https://www.spreaker.com/show/rtp-fourth-branch-podcast
On RTP’s Fourth Branch Podcast, leading experts discuss the pros and cons of government regulations and explain how they affect everyday life for Americans.]]>enPoliticsCopyright The Federalist Societyhttps://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/88becb8dc63defe6c35d45df2d3a3b9f.jpghttps://www.spreaker.com/show/rtp-fourth-branch-podcastTue, 22 Nov 2022 16:45:04 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Federalist Societyrtp@regproject.orgThe Regulatory Transparency Project is a nonprofit, nonpartisan effort dedicated to fostering discussion and a better understanding of regulatory policies. On RTP’s Fourth Branch Podcast, leading experts discuss the pros and cons of government...
On RTP’s Fourth Branch Podcast, leading experts discuss the pros and cons of government regulations and explain how they affect everyday life for Americans.]]>cleanepisodichttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-245-courthouse-steps-o
Featuring:

Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice
Ronald Cass, President, Cass & Associates, PC
Henry Su, Partner, Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP
[Moderator] Svetlana Gans, Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51946085Fri, 18 Nov 2022 21:18:43 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn November 7, the U.S. Supreme Court heard Axon Enterprise, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission, to decide whether Congress stripped federal district courts of jurisdiction over constitutional challenges to the FTC by granting the courts of appeals...
Featuring:

Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice
Ronald Cass, President, Cass & Associates, PC
Henry Su, Partner, Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP
[Moderator] Svetlana Gans, Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3102administrative law & regulatio,corporations,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-244-litigation-update-
The Act exempts from overtime pay workers “employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity,” and the oil company argued that a highly compensated supervisor like Mr. Hewitt qualifies for this “EAP” exemption. The en banc Fifth Circuit applied a Department of Labor regulation requiring EAP-exempt employees to have a fixed weekly salary to conclude that, notwithstanding high pay and supervisory duties, Mr. Hewitt was non-exempt because he was paid on a daily rather than weekly basis.

However, that argument has not been accepted across the bench. Judge Jones dissented that the weekly salary rule is inapplicable for workers who satisfy a separate regulatory requirement for exempt “highly compensated employees” who make over $100,000 per year (now $107,432). Judge Wiener’s dissent added that application of the weekly salary rule—which dates from 1940s—is illogical and unreasonable under the circumstances. DOL took no view on this case.

Additionally, Helix Energy created an apparent split with the First and Second Circuits, and the Supreme Court granted on certiorari May 2, 2022. Oral argument took place October 12. If the Court upholds the decision, employers that relied on the First and Second Circuits may face significant retroactive liability.

In this podcast, experts provide a litigation update on Helix Energy, what it is, what the possible outcomes may be, and the potential consequences of the same.

Featuring:

Dave Dorey, Senior Litigation Counsel, The Fairness Center
Timothy Taylor, Partner, Holland & Knight LLP
[Moderator] Sheng Li, Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance
Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51812495Mon, 07 Nov 2022 16:01:11 +0000The Federalist SocietySome employers were surprised by the en banc Fifth Circuit’s December 2021 decision in Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. v. Hewitt that a supervisor for an offshore oil company who received approximately $1,000 per day for a total of over $200,000...
The Act exempts from overtime pay workers “employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity,” and the oil company argued that a highly compensated supervisor like Mr. Hewitt qualifies for this “EAP” exemption. The en banc Fifth Circuit applied a Department of Labor regulation requiring EAP-exempt employees to have a fixed weekly salary to conclude that, notwithstanding high pay and supervisory duties, Mr. Hewitt was non-exempt because he was paid on a daily rather than weekly basis.

However, that argument has not been accepted across the bench. Judge Jones dissented that the weekly salary rule is inapplicable for workers who satisfy a separate regulatory requirement for exempt “highly compensated employees” who make over $100,000 per year (now $107,432). Judge Wiener’s dissent added that application of the weekly salary rule—which dates from 1940s—is illogical and unreasonable under the circumstances. DOL took no view on this case.

Additionally, Helix Energy created an apparent split with the First and Second Circuits, and the Supreme Court granted on certiorari May 2, 2022. Oral argument took place October 12. If the Court upholds the decision, employers that relied on the First and Second Circuits may face significant retroactive liability.

In this podcast, experts provide a litigation update on Helix Energy, what it is, what the possible outcomes may be, and the potential consequences of the same.

Featuring:

Dave Dorey, Senior Litigation Counsel, The Fairness Center
Timothy Taylor, Partner, Holland & Knight LLP
[Moderator] Sheng Li, Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance
Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3593administrative law & regulatio,labor & employment lawcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-243-is-the-office-of-f
As opposed to sanctioning people, organizations, or particular addresses associated with rogue regimes, OFAC has sanctioned the code of Tornado Cash itself, causing critics to claim that OFAC has exceeded its statutory authority .

In this podcast, experts discuss OFAC’s blacklisting of Tornado Cash, potential litigation from opponents, and the broader implications for financial privacy, national security, and free speech.

Featuring:
Paul Brigner, Head of U.S. Policy and Strategic Advocacy, Electric Coin Company.
Michael Mosier, General Counsel, Espresso Systems
Kevin Werbach, Professor of Legal Studies and Business Ethics at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
Moderator: J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51742745Mon, 31 Oct 2022 19:39:10 +0000The Federalist SocietyTornado Cash is an open source, decentralized cryptocurrency tumbler that was introduced in 2019. The service allows users to mix identifiable Ethereum cryptocurrency funds with others, thus obscuring the trail back to the funds original source. On...
As opposed to sanctioning people, organizations, or particular addresses associated with rogue regimes, OFAC has sanctioned the code of Tornado Cash itself, causing critics to claim that OFAC has exceeded its statutory authority .

In this podcast, experts discuss OFAC’s blacklisting of Tornado Cash, potential litigation from opponents, and the broader implications for financial privacy, national security, and free speech.

Featuring:
Paul Brigner, Head of U.S. Policy and Strategic Advocacy, Electric Coin Company.
Michael Mosier, General Counsel, Espresso Systems
Kevin Werbach, Professor of Legal Studies and Business Ethics at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
Moderator: J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University]]>4150administrative law & regulatio,cryptocurrency,financial services,free speech & election law,international law & trade,international & national secur,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-242-a-global-energy-cr
At a live Regulatory Transparency Project event, following remarks from FERC Commissioner James Danly, an expert panel discussed the present and future challenges facing energy reliability and regulation.

Featuring:
Michael Buschbacher, Counsel, Boyden Gray & Associates
Jennifer Chen, Senior Manager, Clean Energy
Jim Wedeking, Counsel, Sidley Austin LLP
[Moderator] Marc L. Spitzer, Steptoe & Johnson

Visit our website – https://www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51738830Mon, 31 Oct 2022 14:13:37 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn the last few years, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has emerged from relative obscurity to find itself squarely in the middle of many of today’s most contentious public policy fights. As the agency that regulates wholesale...
At a live Regulatory Transparency Project event, following remarks from FERC Commissioner James Danly, an expert panel discussed the present and future challenges facing energy reliability and regulation.

Featuring:
Michael Buschbacher, Counsel, Boyden Gray & Associates
Jennifer Chen, Senior Manager, Clean Energy
Jim Wedeking, Counsel, Sidley Austin LLP
[Moderator] Marc L. Spitzer, Steptoe & Johnson

Visit our website – https://www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3914environmental & energy lawcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-241-a-global-energy-cr
At a live Regulatory Transparency Project event, FERC Commissioner James Danly addressed the present and future challenges facing energy reliability and regulation. An expert panel including Michael Buschbacher, Jennifer Chen, Jim Wedeking, and moderator Marc Spitzer then followed the Commissioner’s remarks with a lively discussion.

Featuring:
James Danly, Commissioner, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Visit our website - https://www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51738740Mon, 31 Oct 2022 14:06:24 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn the last few years, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has emerged from relative obscurity to find itself squarely in the middle of many of today’s most contentious public policy fights. As the agency that regulates wholesale...
At a live Regulatory Transparency Project event, FERC Commissioner James Danly addressed the present and future challenges facing energy reliability and regulation. An expert panel including Michael Buschbacher, Jennifer Chen, Jim Wedeking, and moderator Marc Spitzer then followed the Commissioner’s remarks with a lively discussion.

Featuring:
James Danly, Commissioner, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Visit our website - https://www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1086environmental & energy lawcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-41-government-obstacle
Featuring:

Michael F. Cannon, Director of Health Policy Studies, Cato Institute
[Moderator] Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51704233Wed, 26 Oct 2022 22:14:01 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Goldwater Institute’s Christina Sandefur moderates a discussion with the Cato Institute’s director of health care policy Michael F. Cannon, on the role that the federal government plays in requiring prescriptions for medications. If you would like...
Featuring:

Michael F. Cannon, Director of Health Policy Studies, Cato Institute
[Moderator] Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2584administrative law & regulatio,healthcarecleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-240-courthouse-steps-oral-argu
Join us for a discussion on this important case with Damien Schiff (arguing for petitioners), Tony Francois (represented petitioners in the Ninth Circuit), and William Snape (Director of the American University Washington College of Law’s Program on Environment and Energy Law). The panel will be moderated by Hunton Andrews Kurth partner Matt Leopold, who served previously as EPA general counsel and assisted in drafting the 2020 Navigable Waters Protection Rule defining WOTUS.

Featuring:

Tony Francois, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
Damien Schiff, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
Prof. William Snape, Director of Program on Environmental and Energy Law, Assistant Dean of Adjunct Faculty Affairs, and Fellow in Environmental Law, American University Washington College of Law
Moderator: Matt Leopold, Partner, Hunton Andrews Kurth

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51646868Fri, 21 Oct 2022 16:55:50 +0000The Federalist SocietyOne of the longest-standing environmental law challenges is how to define the scope of waters regulated under the Clean Water Act known as “waters of the United States” (WOTUS). After decades of regulatory uncertainty, the Supreme Court has again...
Join us for a discussion on this important case with Damien Schiff (arguing for petitioners), Tony Francois (represented petitioners in the Ninth Circuit), and William Snape (Director of the American University Washington College of Law’s Program on Environment and Energy Law). The panel will be moderated by Hunton Andrews Kurth partner Matt Leopold, who served previously as EPA general counsel and assisted in drafting the 2020 Navigable Waters Protection Rule defining WOTUS.

Featuring:

Tony Francois, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
Damien Schiff, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
Prof. William Snape, Director of Program on Environmental and Energy Law, Assistant Dean of Adjunct Faculty Affairs, and Fellow in Environmental Law, American University Washington College of Law
Moderator: Matt Leopold, Partner, Hunton Andrews Kurth

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3983environmental & energy lawcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-239-energy-security-afFeaturing:

Prof. James Coleman, Robert G. Storey Distinguished Faculty Fellow and Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law
George Fibbe, Partner, Baker Botts, Former Deputy General Counsel, Department of Energy
Moderator: Daniel G. West, Vice President, SCF Partners

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51635447Thu, 20 Oct 2022 15:34:17 +0000The Federalist SocietyRussia’s invasion of Ukraine shocked the world – and directed renewed attention to the global energy system. Suddenly, the topic of energy security rose to the forefront as consumers across the globe began to feel the impact of the conflict when...Featuring:

Prof. James Coleman, Robert G. Storey Distinguished Faculty Fellow and Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law
George Fibbe, Partner, Baker Botts, Former Deputy General Counsel, Department of Energy
Moderator: Daniel G. West, Vice President, SCF Partners

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3973environmental & energy law,international & national securcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-238-the-future-of-nepa
Featuring:

David Adelman, Harry Reasoner Regents Chair in Law, The University of Texas at Austin School of Law
James W. Coleman, Robert G. Storey Distinguished Faculty Fellow and Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law
[Moderator] Michael Buschbacher, Counsel, Boyden Gray & Associates PLLC

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51553014Wed, 12 Oct 2022 13:54:52 +0000The Federalist SocietyAs a condition of his vote for the Inflation Reduction Act, Sen. Joe Manchin demanded space for his own permitting-reform package in the latest spending bill. While his proposed legislation was ultimately pulled over objections to aspects tangential...
Featuring:

David Adelman, Harry Reasoner Regents Chair in Law, The University of Texas at Austin School of Law
James W. Coleman, Robert G. Storey Distinguished Faculty Fellow and Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law
[Moderator] Michael Buschbacher, Counsel, Boyden Gray & Associates PLLC

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3718administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy lawcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-237-private-rights-of-
Featuring:
Andrew Kingman, President, Mariner Strategies LLC
Keir Lamont, Senior Counsel, Future of Privacy Forum
[Moderator] Jennifer Huddleston, Policy Counsel, NetChoice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51430724Fri, 30 Sep 2022 18:42:42 +0000The Federalist SocietyA private right of action, or the ability of individuals to bring lawsuits for violations of a statute, has been a major point of contention in debates over a potential federal data privacy law. This podcast featuring Andrew Kingman (Mariner...
Featuring:
Andrew Kingman, President, Mariner Strategies LLC
Keir Lamont, Senior Counsel, Future of Privacy Forum
[Moderator] Jennifer Huddleston, Policy Counsel, NetChoice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2816administrative law & regulatio,security & privacycleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-236-sackett-v-epa-how-Featuring:

William W. Buzbee, Professor of Law, Georgetown Law
Damien Schiff, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
[Moderator] Daren Bakst, Senior Research Fellow in Environmental Policy and Regulation, The Heritage Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51427492Fri, 30 Sep 2022 13:49:12 +0000The Federalist SocietyOne of the most controversial and long-standing environmental issues deals with what waters are regulated under the Clean Water Act. For decades, the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers have struggled to define “waters of the United States”...Featuring:

William W. Buzbee, Professor of Law, Georgetown Law
Damien Schiff, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
[Moderator] Daren Bakst, Senior Research Fellow in Environmental Policy and Regulation, The Heritage Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3945administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy lawcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-40-ftcs-new-strategic-
Featuring:

Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice
Asheesh Agarwal, Consultant, American Edge Project and U.S. Chamber of Commerce

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51321425Tue, 20 Sep 2022 15:34:01 +0000The Federalist SocietyAshley Baker and Asheesh Agarwal discuss the FTC's Strategic Plan for 2022 - 2026, which sets out the FTC's priorities over the next five years. Ashley and Asheesh discuss goals that the FTC would like to achieve, their shift from the historically...
Featuring:

Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice
Asheesh Agarwal, Consultant, American Edge Project and U.S. Chamber of Commerce

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1724administrative law & regulatio,corporations,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-39-tax-exclusions-for-employerFeaturing:

Michael F. Cannon, Director of Health Policy Studies, Cato Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51229345Mon, 12 Sep 2022 14:19:14 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Michael F. Cannon argues that the federal income tax exclusion of employer-sponsored health insurance is an "accident of history," and has had a significant impact on the American markets for health insurance, medical care, and on the...Featuring:

Michael F. Cannon, Director of Health Policy Studies, Cato Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3338healthcare,labor & employment lawcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-235-a-discussion-on-th
In this podcast, experts discuss whether the new Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework effectively addresses the concerns of the EU Court of Justice providing for a solid legal basis for future Trans-Atlantic data transfers.

Featuring:

Stewart Baker, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
Theodore Christakis, Professor of International and European Law, University Grenoble Alpes
Peter Swire, Elizabeth and Tommy Holder Chair, Scheller College of Business, Georgia Institute of Technology
[Moderator] Paul Rosenzweig, Professorial Lecturer in Law, The George Washington University
Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51204668Fri, 09 Sep 2022 21:26:29 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe US-EU Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework, announced in March of this year, is a new agreement governing trans-Atlantic data flows between the United States (US) and the European Union (EU) – specifically data flows from EU countries to the U.S....
In this podcast, experts discuss whether the new Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework effectively addresses the concerns of the EU Court of Justice providing for a solid legal basis for future Trans-Atlantic data transfers.

Featuring:

Stewart Baker, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
Theodore Christakis, Professor of International and European Law, University Grenoble Alpes
Peter Swire, Elizabeth and Tommy Holder Chair, Scheller College of Business, Georgia Institute of Technology
[Moderator] Paul Rosenzweig, Professorial Lecturer in Law, The George Washington University
Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3874administrative law & regulatio,international & national secur,regulatory transparency projec,security & privacycleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-234-dobbs-and-the-pote
Featuring:
Stewart Baker, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
Jane Bambauer, Dorothy H. and Lewis Rosenstiel Distinguished Professor of Law, The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law
Danielle Citron, Jefferson Scholars Foundation Schenck Distinguished Professor in Law and Caddell and Chapman Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
[Moderator] Paul Rosenzweig, Professorial Lecturer in Law, The George Washington University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51123378Fri, 02 Sep 2022 21:29:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Supreme Court’s recent abortion decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization will no doubt have many ramifications. One of the more unusual questions is the impact that Dobbs might have on data privacy. It has long been the case, for...
Featuring:
Stewart Baker, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
Jane Bambauer, Dorothy H. and Lewis Rosenstiel Distinguished Professor of Law, The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law
Danielle Citron, Jefferson Scholars Foundation Schenck Distinguished Professor in Law and Caddell and Chapman Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
[Moderator] Paul Rosenzweig, Professorial Lecturer in Law, The George Washington University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3791regulatory transparency projec,security & privacycleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-233-litigation-update-
In CFER v. Alameda County, plaintiffs are Oakland-area taxpayers who allege that county set-asides for Minority Business Enterprises violate federal and California constitutional prohibitions on racial discrimination.

Meanwhile, in Raak Law v. Gast, the plaintiffs are prospective candidates for the Iowa Judicial Nominating Commission. They contend Iowa law establishes a gender quota by staggering the two commissioners' elections and requiring that of the two commissioners from each district, one be female and the other be male.

Listen for a Litigation Update on these two fascinating cases, as Wen Fa reviews the facts and law of these cases, as well as the status of each case.

Featuring:
Wen Fa, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
[Moderator] Dan Morenhoff, Executive Director, Equal Voting Rights Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/51039272Fri, 26 Aug 2022 15:32:09 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn the name of equality, some state and local governments seem to have implemented race-and-gender-based legal quotas in practice if not in name. Wen Fa, an attorney who represents plaintiffs challenging the legality of these laws and policies...
In CFER v. Alameda County, plaintiffs are Oakland-area taxpayers who allege that county set-asides for Minority Business Enterprises violate federal and California constitutional prohibitions on racial discrimination.

Meanwhile, in Raak Law v. Gast, the plaintiffs are prospective candidates for the Iowa Judicial Nominating Commission. They contend Iowa law establishes a gender quota by staggering the two commissioners' elections and requiring that of the two commissioners from each district, one be female and the other be male.

Listen for a Litigation Update on these two fascinating cases, as Wen Fa reviews the facts and law of these cases, as well as the status of each case.

Featuring:
Wen Fa, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
[Moderator] Dan Morenhoff, Executive Director, Equal Voting Rights Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3848litigation,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-38-high-energy-prices-
Featuring:
James W. Coleman, Robert G. Storey Distinguished Faculty Fellow and 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/50998703Mon, 22 Aug 2022 18:01:04 +0000The Federalist SocietyEnergy law expert, Professor James W. Coleman, shares his analysis of the factors causing high energy prices - including public policy on the federal, state, and local level - and suggests some policies that might alleviate high energy prices....
Featuring:
James W. Coleman, Robert G. Storey Distinguished Faculty Fellow and 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.]]>2849environmental & energy lawcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-232-the-implications-o
The panel held that the SEC had violated the defendant’s 7th amendment right to a trial by jury because fraud is not a “public right” claim triable by administrative tribunal but a traditional claim that must be tried by a court. The panel also held that the law giving the SEC authority to choose between court trials and administrative trials of such claims constituted an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority, in violation of the nondelegation doctrine. Finally, the court chipped away at the SEC’s independent status, holding that restrictions on removing administrative law judges only for cause infringed on the president’s vested authority to see that the laws be faithfully executed, in violation of the Constitution’s separation of powers.

What does Jarkesy mean for the future of administrative law? Was the Fifth Circuit following the principles laid down in recent Supreme Court precedent? Or has it struck out on its own, perhaps in an effort to spur the Supreme Court to further curtail the administrative state? The SEC has asked for en banc review. The decision creates an apparent split with the Ninth Circuit decision in Decker Coal v. Pehringer (2021) and could be headed to the Supreme Court.

Featuring:
Jonathan Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law and Director, Coleman P. Burke Center for Environmental Law, Case Western Reserve University School of Law
Mario Loyola, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute
[Moderator] Devin Watkins, Attorney, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/50950160Thu, 18 Aug 2022 13:45:34 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn May, the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a decision of the Securities and Exchange Commission that hedge-fund manager George Jarkesy had committed securities fraud. The case, Jarkesy v. SEC, stuck down an important enforcement provision...
The panel held that the SEC had violated the defendant’s 7th amendment right to a trial by jury because fraud is not a “public right” claim triable by administrative tribunal but a traditional claim that must be tried by a court. The panel also held that the law giving the SEC authority to choose between court trials and administrative trials of such claims constituted an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority, in violation of the nondelegation doctrine. Finally, the court chipped away at the SEC’s independent status, holding that restrictions on removing administrative law judges only for cause infringed on the president’s vested authority to see that the laws be faithfully executed, in violation of the Constitution’s separation of powers.

What does Jarkesy mean for the future of administrative law? Was the Fifth Circuit following the principles laid down in recent Supreme Court precedent? Or has it struck out on its own, perhaps in an effort to spur the Supreme Court to further curtail the administrative state? The SEC has asked for en banc review. The decision creates an apparent split with the Ninth Circuit decision in Decker Coal v. Pehringer (2021) and could be headed to the Supreme Court.

Featuring:
Jonathan Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law and Director, Coleman P. Burke Center for Environmental Law, Case Western Reserve University School of Law
Mario Loyola, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute
[Moderator] Devin Watkins, Attorney, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3736administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-231-west-virginia-v-ep
The decision’s linchpin was the Court’s holding that the Obama Administration’s novel interpretation of a 50-year old statutory provision could not be used to support the broad new powers that EPA had claimed for itself in the Clean Power Plan. Under the court’s “major question doctrine,” Congress must speak clearly to delegate “decisions of vast economic and political significance” to an agency. Together with Justice Neil Gorsuch, who in concurrence further elaborated on his view of non-delegation, the majority opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts signaled that the Court is likely to reject major regulatory innovations by federal agencies that are not based on clear statutory authority.

Featuring:
Daniel Farber, Sho Sato Professor of Law and Faculty Director, Center for Law, Energy, and the Environment, University of California, Berkeley
Adam Gustafson, Senior Counsel for Environmental and Regulatory Affairs, Boeing
Mario Loyola, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute
[Moderator] James Coleman, Robert G. Storey Distinguished Faculty Fellow and 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/50942089Wed, 17 Aug 2022 16:31:24 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn the historic decision of West Virginia v. EPA, the Supreme Court held that the Clean Air Act doesn’t authorize EPA to force America’s electricity sector to switch to renewable sources. The Court invalidated the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, which...
The decision’s linchpin was the Court’s holding that the Obama Administration’s novel interpretation of a 50-year old statutory provision could not be used to support the broad new powers that EPA had claimed for itself in the Clean Power Plan. Under the court’s “major question doctrine,” Congress must speak clearly to delegate “decisions of vast economic and political significance” to an agency. Together with Justice Neil Gorsuch, who in concurrence further elaborated on his view of non-delegation, the majority opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts signaled that the Court is likely to reject major regulatory innovations by federal agencies that are not based on clear statutory authority.

Featuring:
Daniel Farber, Sho Sato Professor of Law and Faculty Director, Center for Law, Energy, and the Environment, University of California, Berkeley
Adam Gustafson, Senior Counsel for Environmental and Regulatory Affairs, Boeing
Mario Loyola, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute
[Moderator] James Coleman, Robert G. Storey Distinguished Faculty Fellow and 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.]]>3742administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-230-who-is-regulating-
Susan Dudley and Paul Ray served as the presidentially appointed administrators of the office in the George W. Bush and Donald Trump administrations, respectively. They shared their perspectives on the importance of this "obscure but powerful" office, and what the lack of a confirmed administrator means for the executive branch and its agencies.

Featuring:
Susan Dudley, Director, GW Regulatory Studies Center & Distinguished Professor of Practice, Trachtenberg School of Public Policy & Public Administration, George Washington University
Paul Ray, Director, Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies, The Heritage Foundation

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/50888709Thu, 11 Aug 2022 16:50:08 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn the Executive Office of the President is a small office that most people outside the Beltway have never heard of. The Office of Information & Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) reviews agencies' draft regulations, public information requests, surveys, etc....
Susan Dudley and Paul Ray served as the presidentially appointed administrators of the office in the George W. Bush and Donald Trump administrations, respectively. They shared their perspectives on the importance of this "obscure but powerful" office, and what the lack of a confirmed administrator means for the executive branch and its agencies.

Featuring:
Susan Dudley, Director, GW Regulatory Studies Center & Distinguished Professor of Practice, Trachtenberg School of Public Policy & Public Administration, George Washington University
Paul Ray, Director, Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies, The Heritage Foundation

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3687administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-229-overcoming-the-cha
The infrastructure bill represents a major public investment in infrastructure development. And yet significant obstacles to infrastructure development remain. Does the infrastructure bill help overcome some of those obstacles? How does the Permitting Action Plan address those obstacles? How can the federal government work with states, localities, tribes and territories to overcome these challenges?

In this webinar, energy policy experts discussed these questions and more.

Featuring:
- Edward Boling, Partner, Perkins Coie LLP
Alex Herrgott, President & CEO, The Permitting Institute
- [Moderator] Mario Loyola, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/50670260Thu, 21 Jul 2022 18:01:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn November 15, 2022, President Biden signed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. On May 11, 2022, the White House released the Permitting Action Plan, to "accelerate and deliver infrastructure projects on time, on task, and on budget." The...
The infrastructure bill represents a major public investment in infrastructure development. And yet significant obstacles to infrastructure development remain. Does the infrastructure bill help overcome some of those obstacles? How does the Permitting Action Plan address those obstacles? How can the federal government work with states, localities, tribes and territories to overcome these challenges?

In this webinar, energy policy experts discussed these questions and more.

Featuring:
- Edward Boling, Partner, Perkins Coie LLP
Alex Herrgott, President & CEO, The Permitting Institute
- [Moderator] Mario Loyola, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3810administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-37-the-defense-product
Featuring:
- J. Kennerly Davis, Jr., Former Senior Attorney, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/50551468Tue, 12 Jul 2022 21:43:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, J. Kennerly Davis, Jr., former Deputy Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Virginia, discusses the historical origin of the Defense Production Act, the powers the Act gives to the president, and recent presidents' invocation of...
Featuring:
- J. Kennerly Davis, Jr., Former Senior Attorney, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1974administrative law & regulatio,law & economics,regulatory transparency projec,separation of powerscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-228-does-the-federal-e
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, is an independent regulatory agency whose enabling statutes include the Federal Power Act and the Natural Gas Act. FERC's statutory responsibilities include regulation of the transmission and wholesale sale of electricity in interstate commerce, and authorization of proposals for the construction and operation of interstate natural gas pipelines and storage facilities.

Doing its part to tackle the climate crisis, FERC has proposed a new policy that will greatly expand the scope of the climate-related environmental impact analysis required for proposed natural gas projects. Traditionally, such analysis has been limited to an evaluation of the emissions that would result directly from the construction and operation of the proposed project. Going forward, FERC is proposing that such analysis will also evaluate the emissions that would result indirectly from the upstream production and downstream use of the natural gas to be handled by the proposed project.

In other policy statements having to do with the electric sector, FERC has announced that it will consider proposals from entities it regulates to add into wholesale electricity prices any charges that are levied by state regulators on greenhouse gases emitted by the power plants producing the electricity.

Does FERC have the legal authority to implement these new climate-related policies and, by doing that, dramatically expand the scope of its regulatory activities? J. Kennerly Davis, Jr. and Bernard McNamee joined us for a probing, wide-ranging discussion of the statutes and case law that provide the answer to this vitally important question.

Featuring:
- J. Kennerly Davis, Jr., Former Senior Attorney, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP; Former Deputy Attorney General for Virginia
- Bernard L. McNamee, Partner, McGuireWoods LLP; Former Commissioner, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/50486894Wed, 06 Jul 2022 18:01:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Biden administration has pledged to meet what it calls "the accelerating threat of climate change" with a wide-ranging campaign to discourage the production and use of fossil fuels in order to control the emission of carbon dioxide and other...
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, is an independent regulatory agency whose enabling statutes include the Federal Power Act and the Natural Gas Act. FERC's statutory responsibilities include regulation of the transmission and wholesale sale of electricity in interstate commerce, and authorization of proposals for the construction and operation of interstate natural gas pipelines and storage facilities.

Doing its part to tackle the climate crisis, FERC has proposed a new policy that will greatly expand the scope of the climate-related environmental impact analysis required for proposed natural gas projects. Traditionally, such analysis has been limited to an evaluation of the emissions that would result directly from the construction and operation of the proposed project. Going forward, FERC is proposing that such analysis will also evaluate the emissions that would result indirectly from the upstream production and downstream use of the natural gas to be handled by the proposed project.

In other policy statements having to do with the electric sector, FERC has announced that it will consider proposals from entities it regulates to add into wholesale electricity prices any charges that are levied by state regulators on greenhouse gases emitted by the power plants producing the electricity.

Does FERC have the legal authority to implement these new climate-related policies and, by doing that, dramatically expand the scope of its regulatory activities? J. Kennerly Davis, Jr. and Bernard McNamee joined us for a probing, wide-ranging discussion of the statutes and case law that provide the answer to this vitally important question.

Featuring:
- J. Kennerly Davis, Jr., Former Senior Attorney, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP; Former Deputy Attorney General for Virginia
- Bernard L. McNamee, Partner, McGuireWoods LLP; Former Commissioner, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3689administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,law & economics,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-227-crypto-wars-balanc
This very timely panel discussed whether the US can develop policies on digital assets that both protect freedom and privacy and maintain our safety from bad actors, and what the trade-offs with the dollar's international role might be.

Featuring:
- Michele Korver, Head of Regulatory, a16z Crypto
- Kathy Kraninger, Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, Solidus Labs; Former Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
- Norbert Michel, Vice President and Director, Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives, Cato Institute
- Mick Mulvaney, Co-Chair, Actum LLC; Former Director, Office of Management and Budget
- [Moderator] Dina Ellis Rochkind, Counsel, Government Affairs and Strategy, Paul Hastings

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/50438610Fri, 01 Jul 2022 20:26:50 +0000The Federalist SocietySenior officials in the Administration have expressed concern about cryptocurrencies being used for criminal activity and undermining the dollar as the global reserve currency. These concerns have been heightened with the Russian invasion of Ukraine,...
This very timely panel discussed whether the US can develop policies on digital assets that both protect freedom and privacy and maintain our safety from bad actors, and what the trade-offs with the dollar's international role might be.

Featuring:
- Michele Korver, Head of Regulatory, a16z Crypto
- Kathy Kraninger, Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, Solidus Labs; Former Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
- Norbert Michel, Vice President and Director, Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives, Cato Institute
- Mick Mulvaney, Co-Chair, Actum LLC; Former Director, Office of Management and Budget
- [Moderator] Dina Ellis Rochkind, Counsel, Government Affairs and Strategy, Paul Hastings

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3648administrative law & regulatio,cryptocurrency,financial services,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-226-due-process-protec
On April 2, 2021, DOT rescinded these rules without the opportunity for public comment. Thereafter Polyweave Packaging Inc., a company that had been issued a civil penalty order by DOT over alleged regulatory violations, filed suit against DOT claiming the agency violated its due process rights by revoking the Bradbury Memo rules.

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky ruled in favor of DOT, the case has been appealed to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals and oral arguments were on May 5, 2022.

Featuring:
- Steven Bradbury, Attorney; Former General Counsel, Department of Transportation
- Sheng Li, Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance
- [Moderator] Beth Williams, Board Member, U.S. Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board; former Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/50426639Thu, 30 Jun 2022 21:05:40 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn February 2019, then General Counsel of the Department of Transportation (DOT), Steven Bradbury, issued a memo later dubbed the "Bradbury Memo" that addressed concerns about civil enforcement abuse at the agency. Parts of the memo were subsequently...
On April 2, 2021, DOT rescinded these rules without the opportunity for public comment. Thereafter Polyweave Packaging Inc., a company that had been issued a civil penalty order by DOT over alleged regulatory violations, filed suit against DOT claiming the agency violated its due process rights by revoking the Bradbury Memo rules.

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky ruled in favor of DOT, the case has been appealed to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals and oral arguments were on May 5, 2022.

Featuring:
- Steven Bradbury, Attorney; Former General Counsel, Department of Transportation
- Sheng Li, Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance
- [Moderator] Beth Williams, Board Member, U.S. Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board; former Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3674administrative law & regulatio,federalism & separation of pow,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-225-state-constitution
Featuring:
- David A. Carrillo, Lecturer in Residence and Executive Director, California Constitution Center, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
- Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater Institute
- Robert F. Williams, Distinguished Professor of Law and Director, Center for State Constitutional Studies, Rutgers University of School of Law
- [Moderator] Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Southeastern Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/50396764Tue, 28 Jun 2022 20:14:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn June 23, 2022, David A. Carrillo, Christina Sandefur, Robert F. Williams and moderator Braden Boucek joined us to debate the different purposes and rights guarantees within state constitutions and the federal constitution. What are the federalism...
Featuring:
- David A. Carrillo, Lecturer in Residence and Executive Director, California Constitution Center, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
- Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater Institute
- Robert F. Williams, Distinguished Professor of Law and Director, Center for State Constitutional Studies, Rutgers University of School of Law
- [Moderator] Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Southeastern Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3761administrative law & regulatio,constitution,regulatory transparency projec,state constitutions,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-224-regulating-the-new
The rapidly emerging crypto ecosystem faces uncertainty within a regulatory regime designed for very different institutions and securities. In response, on March 9, 2022, President Biden issued an executive order, "Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets," which ordered agencies to submit policy recommendations based upon multiple principles such as: providing consumer protection, ensuring U.S. financial system stability, mitigating systemic financial risk, responsibly developing digital assets, and examining the creation of a U.S. Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC). Supporters of increased financial regulation over cryptocurrency see this as a necessity to provide security essential to ensuring financial stability and consumer protection within the digital asset space. Others view these federal regulatory efforts as a threat to future opportunities for economic innovation.

At a live Regulatory Transparency Project event, following remarks from SEC Commissioner Hester M. Peirce, an expert panel including Jerry Brito, Ryan Selkis, Todd Phillips, and moderator J.W. Verret discussed current and future efforts at regulation of cryptocurrency and its implications for innovation, financial stability, and consumer protection.

Featuring:
- Jerry Brito, Executive Director, Coin Center
- Todd Phillips, Director, Financial Regulation and Corporate Governance, Center for American Progress
- Ryan Selkis, Co-Founder and CEO, Messari
- [Moderator] Prof. J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/50299562Wed, 22 Jun 2022 21:45:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyCryptocurrency. Decentralized finance. Nonfungible tokens. Once only experts on the cutting edge of financial services were familiar with these terms. Now, with the emergence of digital assets within the global financial system, crypto, DeFi, and NFTs...
The rapidly emerging crypto ecosystem faces uncertainty within a regulatory regime designed for very different institutions and securities. In response, on March 9, 2022, President Biden issued an executive order, "Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets," which ordered agencies to submit policy recommendations based upon multiple principles such as: providing consumer protection, ensuring U.S. financial system stability, mitigating systemic financial risk, responsibly developing digital assets, and examining the creation of a U.S. Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC). Supporters of increased financial regulation over cryptocurrency see this as a necessity to provide security essential to ensuring financial stability and consumer protection within the digital asset space. Others view these federal regulatory efforts as a threat to future opportunities for economic innovation.

At a live Regulatory Transparency Project event, following remarks from SEC Commissioner Hester M. Peirce, an expert panel including Jerry Brito, Ryan Selkis, Todd Phillips, and moderator J.W. Verret discussed current and future efforts at regulation of cryptocurrency and its implications for innovation, financial stability, and consumer protection.

Featuring:
- Jerry Brito, Executive Director, Coin Center
- Todd Phillips, Director, Financial Regulation and Corporate Governance, Center for American Progress
- Ryan Selkis, Co-Founder and CEO, Messari
- [Moderator] Prof. J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, 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.]]>4094administrative law & regulatio,cryptocurrency,financial services & e-commerc,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-223-regulating-the-new
The rapidly emerging crypto ecosystem faces uncertainty within a regulatory regime designed for very different institutions and securities. In response, on March 9, 2022, President Biden issued an executive order, "Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets," which ordered agencies to submit policy recommendations based upon multiple principles such as: providing consumer protection, ensuring U.S. financial system stability, mitigating systemic financial risk, responsibly developing digital assets, and examining the creation of a U.S. Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC). Supporters of increased financial regulation over cryptocurrency see this as a necessity to provide security essential to ensuring financial stability and consumer protection within the digital asset space. Others view these federal regulatory efforts as a threat to future opportunities for economic innovation.

At a live Regulatory Transparency Project event, SEC Commissioner Hester M. Peirce addressed current and future efforts at regulation of cryptocurrency and its implications for innovation, financial stability, and consumer protection. An expert panel including Jerry Brito, Ryan Selkis, Todd Phillips, and moderator by J.W. Verret then followed the Commissioner's remarks with a lively panel discussion.

Featuring:
- Hon. Hester M. Peirce, Commissioner, United States Securities and Exchange Commission
- [Introduction] Prof. J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/50299559Wed, 22 Jun 2022 21:26:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyCryptocurrency. Decentralized finance. Nonfungible tokens. Once only experts on the cutting edge of financial services were familiar with these terms. Now, with the emergence of digital assets within the global financial system, crypto, DeFi, and NFTs...
The rapidly emerging crypto ecosystem faces uncertainty within a regulatory regime designed for very different institutions and securities. In response, on March 9, 2022, President Biden issued an executive order, "Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets," which ordered agencies to submit policy recommendations based upon multiple principles such as: providing consumer protection, ensuring U.S. financial system stability, mitigating systemic financial risk, responsibly developing digital assets, and examining the creation of a U.S. Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC). Supporters of increased financial regulation over cryptocurrency see this as a necessity to provide security essential to ensuring financial stability and consumer protection within the digital asset space. Others view these federal regulatory efforts as a threat to future opportunities for economic innovation.

At a live Regulatory Transparency Project event, SEC Commissioner Hester M. Peirce addressed current and future efforts at regulation of cryptocurrency and its implications for innovation, financial stability, and consumer protection. An expert panel including Jerry Brito, Ryan Selkis, Todd Phillips, and moderator by J.W. Verret then followed the Commissioner's remarks with a lively panel discussion.

Featuring:
- Hon. Hester M. Peirce, Commissioner, United States Securities and Exchange Commission
- [Introduction] Prof. J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, 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.]]>3144administrative law & regulatio,cryptocurrency,financial services & e-commerc,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-222-the-return-of-supp
As defined by the Biden administration, SEPs are "local projects that defendants can agree to undertake as part of an enforcement case settlement to help rectify environmental violations." These projects were outlawed under the Trump DOJ due to concerns that their use expands DOJ discretionary authority beyond its statutory limits. The Biden administration, however, argues that "SEPs help to fulfill the goals of the underlying statutes being enforced and can provide important environmental and public health benefits to communities that have been harmed by environmental violations."

On June 15, 2022, three executive branch veterans with a range of views on the issue joined us for a virtual discussion on the return of SEPs.

Featuring:
- Michael Buschbacher, Counsel, Boyden Gray & Associates PLLC
- Justin A. Savage, Global Co-Lead, Environmental Team, Sidley Austin LLP
- [Moderator] Annie Donaldson Talley, Partner, Luther Strange and Associates

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/50284660Tue, 21 Jun 2022 21:12:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn May 5, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a new "Comprehensive Environmental Justice Strategy." One piece of this new strategy was an Interim Final Rule reintroducing the use of Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) in...
As defined by the Biden administration, SEPs are "local projects that defendants can agree to undertake as part of an enforcement case settlement to help rectify environmental violations." These projects were outlawed under the Trump DOJ due to concerns that their use expands DOJ discretionary authority beyond its statutory limits. The Biden administration, however, argues that "SEPs help to fulfill the goals of the underlying statutes being enforced and can provide important environmental and public health benefits to communities that have been harmed by environmental violations."

On June 15, 2022, three executive branch veterans with a range of views on the issue joined us for a virtual discussion on the return of SEPs.

Featuring:
- Michael Buschbacher, Counsel, Boyden Gray & Associates PLLC
- Justin A. Savage, Global Co-Lead, Environmental Team, Sidley Austin LLP
- [Moderator] Annie Donaldson Talley, Partner, Luther Strange and Associates

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3669cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-221-a-discussion-on-oc
Utah Governor Spencer J. Cox opened the program with remarks on licensing reforms his state has recently pursued, and an expert panel featuring Jon Gabriel, Scott Lincicome, Colin Mortimer, and moderator Shoshana Weissmann then broke down the Governor’s remarks and discussed the issue more broadly.

Featuring:
- Spencer J. Cox, Governor, State of Utah
- Jon Gabriel, Editor-in-Chief, Ricochet
- Scott Lincicome, Director, General Economics and the Herbert A. Stiefel Center for Trade Policy Studies, Cato Institute
- Colin Mortimer, Director, Center for New Liberalism
- [Moderator] Shoshana Weissmann, Senior Manager of Digital Media and Fellow, R Street Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/50218245Wed, 15 Jun 2022 20:14:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn June 7, 2022, the Regulatory Transparency Project hosted a live discussion on occupational licensing via Twitter Spaces. Utah Governor Spencer J. Cox opened the program with remarks on licensing reforms his state has recently pursued, and an...
Utah Governor Spencer J. Cox opened the program with remarks on licensing reforms his state has recently pursued, and an expert panel featuring Jon Gabriel, Scott Lincicome, Colin Mortimer, and moderator Shoshana Weissmann then broke down the Governor’s remarks and discussed the issue more broadly.

Featuring:
- Spencer J. Cox, Governor, State of Utah
- Jon Gabriel, Editor-in-Chief, Ricochet
- Scott Lincicome, Director, General Economics and the Herbert A. Stiefel Center for Trade Policy Studies, Cato Institute
- Colin Mortimer, Director, Center for New Liberalism
- [Moderator] Shoshana Weissmann, Senior Manager of Digital Media and Fellow, R Street Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3367administrative law & regulatio,labor & employment law,law & economics,regulatory transparency projec,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-220-the-government-s-a
Will regulation be designed to avoid discouraging innovation in a highly creative environment? Fears have been expressed that unregulated cryptocurrency could theoretically present systemic risk, and consumers may need to be protected–particularly in light of the recent collapse of the Luna cryptocurrency and its related Terra stablecoin. Some believe that regulation may be an opportunity to include those presently unserved by the banking system. Complicating this already complicated picture may be rivalry among multiple federal agencies, including the banking regulators, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission, each of which may make a case for potential authority over aspects of the cryptocurrency industry. Our panel of experts addressed these timely and controversial questions.

Featuring:
- Douglas Elliott, Partner, Oliver Wyaman
- Michael Piwowar, Executive Director, Milken Institute Center for Financial Markets
- Dawn Stump, Former Commissioner, U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission
- Thomas Vartanian, Executive Director, Financial Technology & Cybersecurity Center
- [Moderator] Paul N. Watkins, Senior Advisor, Patomak Global Partners

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/50039343Thu, 02 Jun 2022 14:28:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyAs the cryptocurrency industry grows, state and federal governments are considering how that industry should be regulated. The President has directed the Secretary of the Treasury to report soon on the issues involved. A draft bill that would regulate...
Will regulation be designed to avoid discouraging innovation in a highly creative environment? Fears have been expressed that unregulated cryptocurrency could theoretically present systemic risk, and consumers may need to be protected–particularly in light of the recent collapse of the Luna cryptocurrency and its related Terra stablecoin. Some believe that regulation may be an opportunity to include those presently unserved by the banking system. Complicating this already complicated picture may be rivalry among multiple federal agencies, including the banking regulators, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission, each of which may make a case for potential authority over aspects of the cryptocurrency industry. Our panel of experts addressed these timely and controversial questions.

Featuring:
- Douglas Elliott, Partner, Oliver Wyaman
- Michael Piwowar, Executive Director, Milken Institute Center for Financial Markets
- Dawn Stump, Former Commissioner, U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission
- Thomas Vartanian, Executive Director, Financial Technology & Cybersecurity Center
- [Moderator] Paul N. Watkins, Senior Advisor, Patomak Global Partners

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3786administrative law & regulatio,corporations,cryptocurrency,financial services,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-36-restrictions-on-dir
Featuring:
- Daniel Crane, Frederick Paul Furth Sr. Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law School
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/49866294Thu, 19 May 2022 20:01:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Adam Thierer interviews Professor Daniel Crane regarding state restrictions on direct car sales and their implications for automobile markets, including the antitrust concerns they may raise. Featuring: - Daniel Crane, Frederick...
Featuring:
- Daniel Crane, Frederick Paul Furth Sr. Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law School
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1859administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrust,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-episode-17-governor-doug-du
This episode was co-sponsored by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

Featuring:
- Doug Ducey, Governor, State of Arizona
- Brent Skorup, Senior Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/49822301Mon, 16 May 2022 21:19:43 +0000The Federalist SocietyEight years after he was first sworn in, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey will leave office in January 2023 due to the state's limit of two consecutive terms. In this episode, Governor Ducey joined tech policy experts Brent Skorup and Adam Thierer to...
This episode was co-sponsored by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

Featuring:
- Doug Ducey, Governor, State of Arizona
- Brent Skorup, Senior Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2047administrative law & regulatio,law & economics,regulatory transparency projec,state governments,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-episode-16-the-catawba-digi
In this episode, Catawba Digital Economic Zone CEO Joseph McKinney joined tech policy expert Ryan Hagemann to discuss the Zone and its novel regulatory framework.

Featuring:
- Joseph McKinney, CEO, Catawba Digital Economic Zone
- [Moderator] Ryan Hagemann, Co-Director, IBM PolicyLab

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/49682421Thu, 05 May 2022 20:51:06 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn February 2022, the Catawba Nation of South Carolina voted to approve the first tribal digital economic zone in the United States. This "Catawba Digital Economic Zone" includes an independent regulatory framework and commercial code, which its...
In this episode, Catawba Digital Economic Zone CEO Joseph McKinney joined tech policy expert Ryan Hagemann to discuss the Zone and its novel regulatory framework.

Featuring:
- Joseph McKinney, CEO, Catawba Digital Economic Zone
- [Moderator] Ryan Hagemann, Co-Director, IBM PolicyLab

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1399administrative law & regulatio,financial services,financial services & e-commerc,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-219-four-years-later-d
As the current administration continues to reevaluate its antitrust policies and rolls back some "New Madison" policies, an expert panel discussed the impact of these policies, including whether they did more to promote innovation or to spark unnecessary litigation, and examined upcoming issues in the areas of SEPs and Standards-Setting Organizations.

Featuring:
- Jay Jurata, Partner and Antitrust & Competition Practice Group Leader, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
- Taylor Owings, Partner, Baker Botts L.L.P.
- [Moderator] Brian Pandya, Partner, Duane Morris LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/49575173Wed, 27 Apr 2022 21:15:10 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn 2018, then-Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim announced with great fanfare the "New Madison Approach" to intellectual property and antitrust disputes, rejecting the application of antitrust law to licensing disputes involving Standards...
As the current administration continues to reevaluate its antitrust policies and rolls back some "New Madison" policies, an expert panel discussed the impact of these policies, including whether they did more to promote innovation or to spark unnecessary litigation, and examined upcoming issues in the areas of SEPs and Standards-Setting Organizations.

Featuring:
- Jay Jurata, Partner and Antitrust & Competition Practice Group Leader, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
- Taylor Owings, Partner, Baker Botts L.L.P.
- [Moderator] Brian Pandya, Partner, Duane Morris LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3801administrative law & regulatio,corporations,intellectual property,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-35-why-was-the-cdcs-tr
Health law and policy expert Joel Zinberg joined the podcast to break down the ruling and examine the strategy behind the Department of Justice's decision to appeal it without requesting a stay.

Featuring:
- Joel Zinberg, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/49561774Tue, 26 Apr 2022 19:02:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn April 18, Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida vacated the Centers for Disease Control's mask mandate for public transportation. Health law and policy expert Joel Zinberg joined the...
Health law and policy expert Joel Zinberg joined the podcast to break down the ruling and examine the strategy behind the Department of Justice's decision to appeal it without requesting a stay.

Featuring:
- Joel Zinberg, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1492administrative law & regulatio,healthcare,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-218-a-discussion-on-st
But as stablecoins gain prominence, concerns have arisen over risks they might pose to the financial system. Some, such as Senate Banking Committee Ranking Member Pat Toomey, have argued for light-touch regulation for stablecoin issuers that would simply require disclosure of reserves and redemption policies. Others have called for strict bank-like regulation on stablecoins with reserve requirements that specify the amount of assets stablecoin issuers must hold and backstop guarantee programs similar to deposit insurance. The President’s Working Group on Financial Markets of the Biden Administration recently recommended that federal laws should only allow stablecoins to be issued by "insured depository institutions" such as banks and savings associations. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is also sending signals that it considers stablecoins as well as other cryptocurrencies to be "securities," and will subject them to regulatory enforcement under securities laws, despite, as some argue, the lack of clear authority by Congress.

This webinar explored the potential of stablecoins as a payment instrument, the inefficiencies of the current payment system, and the appropriate level of regulation that allows for beneficial innovation in this sector.

Featuring:
- Paul Jossey, Principal Attorney, Jossey PLLC
- Timothy Massad, Consultant; Adjunct Professor of Law, Georgetown Law
- [Moderator] John Berlau, Senior Fellow & Director of Finance Policy, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/49483647Tue, 19 Apr 2022 20:20:19 +0000The Federalist SocietyStablecoins are unique types of digital tokens that have emerged out of the cryptocurrency revolution and have taken center stage in the debate about crypto regulation. Tied to the value of an asset or fiat currency such as the dollar, stablecoins...
But as stablecoins gain prominence, concerns have arisen over risks they might pose to the financial system. Some, such as Senate Banking Committee Ranking Member Pat Toomey, have argued for light-touch regulation for stablecoin issuers that would simply require disclosure of reserves and redemption policies. Others have called for strict bank-like regulation on stablecoins with reserve requirements that specify the amount of assets stablecoin issuers must hold and backstop guarantee programs similar to deposit insurance. The President’s Working Group on Financial Markets of the Biden Administration recently recommended that federal laws should only allow stablecoins to be issued by "insured depository institutions" such as banks and savings associations. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is also sending signals that it considers stablecoins as well as other cryptocurrencies to be "securities," and will subject them to regulatory enforcement under securities laws, despite, as some argue, the lack of clear authority by Congress.

This webinar explored the potential of stablecoins as a payment instrument, the inefficiencies of the current payment system, and the appropriate level of regulation that allows for beneficial innovation in this sector.

Featuring:
- Paul Jossey, Principal Attorney, Jossey PLLC
- Timothy Massad, Consultant; Adjunct Professor of Law, Georgetown Law
- [Moderator] John Berlau, Senior Fellow & Director of Finance Policy, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3906administrative law & regulatio,financial services,financial services & e-commerc,law & economics,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-217-the-separation-of-
Expanding on a Regulatory Transparency Project panel discussion on emergency executive power during the pandemic, this event featured experts engaging in a broader separation of powers discussion about the distinctions between the federal and state separation of powers doctrines, using California as an example.

In a conversation moderated by Braden Boucek, David. A. Carrillo, Luke A. Wake, and John C. Yoo explored those distinctions, examined how they affect the latitude and options state and federal executives have, and debated the extent to which federal separation of powers doctrines can or should be applied to the states through judicial interpretation.

Featuring:
- David A. Carrillo, Lecturer in Residence and Executive Director, California Constitution Center, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
- Luke A. Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- John C. Yoo, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law; Co-Faculty Director, Korea Law Center; and Director, Public Law & Policy Program, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
- [Moderator] Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Southeastern Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/49445060Fri, 15 Apr 2022 14:54:08 +0000The Federalist SocietyAre state governors subject to the same separation of powers restrictions as the federal president? Expanding on a Regulatory Transparency Project panel discussion on emergency executive power during the pandemic, this event featured experts...
Expanding on a Regulatory Transparency Project panel discussion on emergency executive power during the pandemic, this event featured experts engaging in a broader separation of powers discussion about the distinctions between the federal and state separation of powers doctrines, using California as an example.

In a conversation moderated by Braden Boucek, David. A. Carrillo, Luke A. Wake, and John C. Yoo explored those distinctions, examined how they affect the latitude and options state and federal executives have, and debated the extent to which federal separation of powers doctrines can or should be applied to the states through judicial interpretation.

Featuring:
- David A. Carrillo, Lecturer in Residence and Executive Director, California Constitution Center, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
- Luke A. Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- John C. Yoo, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law; Co-Faculty Director, Korea Law Center; and Director, Public Law & Policy Program, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
- [Moderator] Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Southeastern Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3873administrative law & regulatio,constitution,federalism & separation of pow,regulatory transparency projec,state constitutions,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-216-title-vi-college-a
Featuring:
- Theodore Johnson, Director, Fellows Program, Brennan Center for Justice
- Althea Nagai, Senior Research Fellow, Center for Equal Opportunity
- [Moderator] Linda Chavez, Chairman, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/49401270Mon, 11 Apr 2022 18:37:48 +0000The Federalist SocietyWith the Supreme Court about to hear two cases involving the use of race in admissions at Harvard and the University of North Carolina, what do Americans actually think about preferential treatment? Dr. Althea Nagai, Senior Research Fellow at the...
Featuring:
- Theodore Johnson, Director, Fellows Program, Brennan Center for Justice
- Althea Nagai, Senior Research Fellow, Center for Equal Opportunity
- [Moderator] Linda Chavez, Chairman, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3696administrative law & regulatio,affirmative action,civil rights,education policy,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-episode-15-rail-automation-
Read Ike's recent paper on the topic here: https://www.cato.org/regulation/spring-2022/switching-wrong-track

Featuring:
- Ian Adams, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics
- Ike Brannon, President, Capital Policy Analytics

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/49243797Tue, 29 Mar 2022 18:54:28 +0000The Federalist SocietyExperts Ian Adams and Ike Brannon join the podcast to break down recent proposals regarding forced access to railroads. Is concentration an issue within the rail industry? If so, would forced access solve the problem? And what implications would a...
Read Ike's recent paper on the topic here: https://www.cato.org/regulation/spring-2022/switching-wrong-track

Featuring:
- Ian Adams, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics
- Ike Brannon, President, Capital Policy Analytics

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>995administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrust,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-215-sundown-for-the-su
Critics of the rule argue that committing HHS to reassessing the economic impacts of many of the department's existing regulations is a large undertaking and it establishes an extreme penalty for noncompliance. Last fall, HHS issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to rescind the SUNSET Rule, and reports suggest a final repeal may be near. This webinar discussed the SUNSET rule, the effort to repeal it, and possible future actions in this area.

Featuring:
- William Funk, Lewis & Clark Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus, Lewis & Clark Law School
Jonah Hecht, Attorney, McGonigle; Former Deputy General Counsel, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
[Moderator] Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Small Business Legal Center

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/49238420Tue, 29 Mar 2022 14:02:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn January 2021, the Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") finalized its SUNSET Rule. Section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act ("RFA") requires agencies to have a written plan to review their significant regulations every ten years to...
Critics of the rule argue that committing HHS to reassessing the economic impacts of many of the department's existing regulations is a large undertaking and it establishes an extreme penalty for noncompliance. Last fall, HHS issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to rescind the SUNSET Rule, and reports suggest a final repeal may be near. This webinar discussed the SUNSET rule, the effort to repeal it, and possible future actions in this area.

Featuring:
- William Funk, Lewis & Clark Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus, Lewis & Clark Law School
Jonah Hecht, Attorney, McGonigle; Former Deputy General Counsel, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
[Moderator] Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Small Business Legal Center

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3829administrative law & regulatio,healthcare,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-214-emergency-manageme
The Regulatory Transparency Project hosted a virtual discussion on Wednesday, March 16 featuring an expert panel debating whether states should be updating and reforming their emergency management statutes in light of our collective experience with emergency governance over the past 24 months. Braden Boucek of the Southeastern Legal Foundation moderated the discussion between David A. Carrillo of the U.C. Berkeley California Constitution Center and Luke A. Wake of the Pacific Legal Foundation.

Featuring:
- David Carrillo, Lecturer in Residence and Executive Director, California Constitution Center, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
- Luke Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- [Moderator] Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Southeastern Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/49105456Fri, 18 Mar 2022 14:33:04 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic was sweeping the country and governors throughout the nation were issuing declarations of emergency. What followed was a perhaps unprecedented period of emergency governance, wherein governors in many states...
The Regulatory Transparency Project hosted a virtual discussion on Wednesday, March 16 featuring an expert panel debating whether states should be updating and reforming their emergency management statutes in light of our collective experience with emergency governance over the past 24 months. Braden Boucek of the Southeastern Legal Foundation moderated the discussion between David A. Carrillo of the U.C. Berkeley California Constitution Center and Luke A. Wake of the Pacific Legal Foundation.

Featuring:
- David Carrillo, Lecturer in Residence and Executive Director, California Constitution Center, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
- Luke Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- [Moderator] Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Southeastern Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3613administrative law & regulatio,federalism & separation of pow,healthcare,regulatory transparency projec,state constitutions,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-213-after-california-a
Featuring:
- Daniel Castro, Vice President and Director, Center for Data Innovation, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
- Keir Lamont, Senior Counsel, Future of Privacy Forum
- [Moderator] Jennifer Huddleston, Policy Counsel, NetChoice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/49095370Thu, 17 Mar 2022 15:31:37 +0000The Federalist SocietyData privacy and data security are tech policy concerns that resonate with many voters and policymakers. In the absence of federal data privacy legislation, some states have passed, and others are considering, their own legislation to deal with data...
Featuring:
- Daniel Castro, Vice President and Director, Center for Data Innovation, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
- Keir Lamont, Senior Counsel, Future of Privacy Forum
- [Moderator] Jennifer Huddleston, Policy Counsel, NetChoice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3479administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-212-litigation-update-
Featuring:
- Wen Fa, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/49032686Fri, 11 Mar 2022 19:23:52 +0000The Federalist SocietyFaced with a limited supply of recently-approved COVID-19 treatments, both the State and City of New York have issued directives instructing physicians and providers on how to prioritize treatment. One of the factors to be considered is race. In...
Featuring:
- Wen Fa, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1980administrative law & regulatio,affirmative action,healthcare,litigation,regulatory transparency projec,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-211-section-230-common
Featuring:
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- Kristian Stout, Director of Innovation Policy, International Center for Law & Economics
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/48983053Mon, 07 Mar 2022 18:32:38 +0000The Federalist SocietySocial media has become a prominent way for lawmakers, public agencies, experts, and governments to communicate with the public. Meanwhile, a once-obscure provision in federal communications law — Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act — has...
Featuring:
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- Kristian Stout, Director of Innovation Policy, International Center for Law & Economics
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3612administrative law & regulatio,law & economics,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-34-institute-for-justihttps://ij.org/report/barriers-to-business/.

In this episode, Meleta and Montgomery join the Goldwater Institute's Jon Riches to discuss the major takeaways from their report and how cities can better attract and support entrepreneurs.

Featuring:
- Andrew Meleta, Activism Associate, Institute for Justice
- Alex Montgomery, City Policy Associate, Institute for Justice
- [Moderator] Jon Riches, Director of National Litigation, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/48928706Wed, 02 Mar 2022 21:33:00 +0000The Federalist Society"To better understand the challenges small businesses face and to offer recommendations," Institute for Justice's Andrew Meleta and Alex Montgomery "analyzed the codes of 20 large to mid-sized cities, interviewed entrepreneurs from across the country,...https://ij.org/report/barriers-to-business/.

In this episode, Meleta and Montgomery join the Goldwater Institute's Jon Riches to discuss the major takeaways from their report and how cities can better attract and support entrepreneurs.

Featuring:
- Andrew Meleta, Activism Associate, Institute for Justice
- Alex Montgomery, City Policy Associate, Institute for Justice
- [Moderator] Jon Riches, Director of National Litigation, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1366administrative law & regulatio,law & economics,regulatory transparency projec,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-210-cryptocurrencies-m
Featuring:
- Oonagh McDonald, Senior Adviser, Crito Capital
- [Moderator] Jerry Brito, Executive Director, Coin Center

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/48874764Fri, 25 Feb 2022 20:17:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyDr. Oonagh McDonald’s latest book, “Cryptocurrencies: Money, Trust and Regulation,” discusses the nature of money, the introduction of the first cryptocurrency – Bitcoin – and the maturation of the space, how regulators have approached the burgeoning...
Featuring:
- Oonagh McDonald, Senior Adviser, Crito Capital
- [Moderator] Jerry Brito, Executive Director, Coin Center

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3736administrative law & regulatio,corporations,financial services,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-episode-14-telematics-in-ca
Read Ian's recent piece on the topic here: https://www.insurancejournal.com/blogs/law-and-economics/2022/02/17/654839.htm

Featuring:
- Ian Adams, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/48860808Thu, 24 Feb 2022 18:55:28 +0000The Federalist SocietyIan Adams joined the podcast to break down the policy aspects of a recent Twitter spat between Elon Musk and California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara. What are telematics, and how are they used by the auto insurance industry? What is...
Read Ian's recent piece on the topic here: https://www.insurancejournal.com/blogs/law-and-economics/2022/02/17/654839.htm

Featuring:
- Ian Adams, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>650administrative law & regulatio,corporations,law & economics,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrust,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-209-who-should-decide-
Featuring:
- Michael Cannon, Director of Health Policy Studies, Cato Institute
- Joshua Sharfstein, Vice Dean for Public Health Practice and Community Engagement, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University
- [Moderator] Dan Troy, Chief Business Officer, Chief Administrative Officer, and General Counsel, Valo

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/48788035Fri, 18 Feb 2022 19:13:29 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn October 2020, Michael Cannon and Jeffrey Singer proposed ending the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's authority to decide which drugs are available only by prescription. Their solution: leaving the decision to the drugs' manufacturers. This...
Featuring:
- Michael Cannon, Director of Health Policy Studies, Cato Institute
- Joshua Sharfstein, Vice Dean for Public Health Practice and Community Engagement, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University
- [Moderator] Dan Troy, Chief Business Officer, Chief Administrative Officer, and General Counsel, Valo

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3643administrative law & regulatio,healthcare,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-33-litigation-update-s
Paul Avelar and Braden Boucek, who are representing the plaintiffs in the case, joined the podcast to break down the case from their clients' point of view.

Featuring:
- Paul Avelar, Managing Attorney, Arizona Office, Institute for Justice
- [Moderator] Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Southeastern Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/48733568Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:05:25 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn January 26, the Tennessee State Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Shaw et. al. v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, a case in which the plaintiffs are challenging a zoning provision that prevented them operating...
Paul Avelar and Braden Boucek, who are representing the plaintiffs in the case, joined the podcast to break down the case from their clients' point of view.

Featuring:
- Paul Avelar, Managing Attorney, Arizona Office, Institute for Justice
- [Moderator] Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Southeastern Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2946administrative law & regulatio,law & economics,litigation,regulatory transparency projec,state courtscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-208-a-debate-on-covid-
Featuring:
- Lawrence Gostin, University Professor, Founding Linda D. & Timothy J. O'Neill Professor of Global Health Law, Faculty Director of O'Neill Institute for National & Global Health Law, Georgetown University
- David Hyman, Scott K. Ginsburg Professor of Health Law & Policy, Georgetown University
- Jenin Younes, Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance
- [Moderator] Courtney Stone Mirski, Editor in Chief, Food and Drug Law Journal
- [Introduction] Elizabeth Henry, President, Federalist Society's Georgetown Law Student Chapter

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/48692659Fri, 11 Feb 2022 18:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn February 2, 2022, Lawrence Gostin, David Hyman, and Jenin Younes joined the Federalist Society's Georgetown Law Student Chapter to debate COVID-19 vaccine mandates. Featuring: - Lawrence Gostin, University Professor, Founding Linda D. & Timothy...
Featuring:
- Lawrence Gostin, University Professor, Founding Linda D. & Timothy J. O'Neill Professor of Global Health Law, Faculty Director of O'Neill Institute for National & Global Health Law, Georgetown University
- David Hyman, Scott K. Ginsburg Professor of Health Law & Policy, Georgetown University
- Jenin Younes, Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance
- [Moderator] Courtney Stone Mirski, Editor in Chief, Food and Drug Law Journal
- [Introduction] Elizabeth Henry, President, Federalist Society's Georgetown Law Student Chapter

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3559administrative law & regulatio,federalism & separation of pow,healthcare,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-207-litigation-update-
In the years since their enactment, observers have accused colleges and universities of violating Titles VI and IX in various ways. Many Title IX concerns have involved single-sex, female-only programs, scholarships, awards, fellowships, camps, clubs, etc. Others have involved single-sex, male-only programs. And recently, programs or scholarships for BIPOC-only or people of color have invoked Title VI concerns. One such observer of these potential civil rights violations is professor emeritus of economics at the University of Michigan, Mark Perry.

Over the last three years, Professor Perry has identified more than 1,200 Title IX and Title VI alleged violations and has filed complaints with the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) against nearly 400 colleges and universities which have resulted in nearly 200 federal investigations and more than 100 resolutions, mostly in his favor.

However, after years of this work, Professor Perry announced recently that he has noticed what he describes as a "significant departure from past practices" in what OCR now requires of Title VI and Title IX complaints. Professor Perry joined Devon Westhill to provide an update on his civil rights advocacy and what he views as "troubling signs" at the Biden-Cardona-Lhamon OCR for a discrimination-free educational experience for all.

Featuring:
- Mark Perry, Senior Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
- [Moderator] Devon Westhill, President and General Counsel, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/48663732Wed, 09 Feb 2022 21:15:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyTitle IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 supplemented Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include, in addition to barring discrimination on the ground of race, color, or national origin, sex as a protected class in federally funded...
In the years since their enactment, observers have accused colleges and universities of violating Titles VI and IX in various ways. Many Title IX concerns have involved single-sex, female-only programs, scholarships, awards, fellowships, camps, clubs, etc. Others have involved single-sex, male-only programs. And recently, programs or scholarships for BIPOC-only or people of color have invoked Title VI concerns. One such observer of these potential civil rights violations is professor emeritus of economics at the University of Michigan, Mark Perry.

Over the last three years, Professor Perry has identified more than 1,200 Title IX and Title VI alleged violations and has filed complaints with the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) against nearly 400 colleges and universities which have resulted in nearly 200 federal investigations and more than 100 resolutions, mostly in his favor.

However, after years of this work, Professor Perry announced recently that he has noticed what he describes as a "significant departure from past practices" in what OCR now requires of Title VI and Title IX complaints. Professor Perry joined Devon Westhill to provide an update on his civil rights advocacy and what he views as "troubling signs" at the Biden-Cardona-Lhamon OCR for a discrimination-free educational experience for all.

Featuring:
- Mark Perry, Senior Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
- [Moderator] Devon Westhill, President and General Counsel, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3640administrative law & regulatio,civil rights,education policy,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-episode-13-autonomous-vehic
Related Reading:
- "Congress' failure to enact an automated vehicle regulatory framework is an opportunity for states"
(https://reason.org/commentary/congress-failure-to-enact-an-automated-vehicle-regulatory-framework-is-an-opportunity-for-states/)
- "Challenges and Opportunities for Federal Automated Vehicle Policy"
(https://reason.org/policy-brief/challenges-and-opportunities-for-federal-automated-vehicle-policy/)
- "10 Best Practices For State Automated Vehicle Policy"
(https://reason.org/policy-brief/10-best-practices-for-state-automated-vehicle-policy/)
- "Elon Musk and the Coming Federal Showdown Over Driverless Vehicles"
(https://www.discoursemagazine.com/economics/2021/11/22/elon-musk-and-the-coming-federal-showdown-over-driverless-vehicles/)

Featuring:
- Marc Scribner, Senior Transportation Policy Analyst, Reason Foundation
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/48559543Wed, 02 Feb 2022 16:38:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyExperts Marc Scribner and Adam Thierer join us to provide an update on autonomous vehicle (AV) policy. Why has Congress been unable to pass significant AV legislation? How have the Department of Transportation and state governments filled that void?...
Related Reading:
- "Congress' failure to enact an automated vehicle regulatory framework is an opportunity for states"
(https://reason.org/commentary/congress-failure-to-enact-an-automated-vehicle-regulatory-framework-is-an-opportunity-for-states/)
- "Challenges and Opportunities for Federal Automated Vehicle Policy"
(https://reason.org/policy-brief/challenges-and-opportunities-for-federal-automated-vehicle-policy/)
- "10 Best Practices For State Automated Vehicle Policy"
(https://reason.org/policy-brief/10-best-practices-for-state-automated-vehicle-policy/)
- "Elon Musk and the Coming Federal Showdown Over Driverless Vehicles"
(https://www.discoursemagazine.com/economics/2021/11/22/elon-musk-and-the-coming-federal-showdown-over-driverless-vehicles/)

Featuring:
- Marc Scribner, Senior Transportation Policy Analyst, Reason Foundation
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1966administrative law & regulatio,federalism,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-32-the-vaccine-mandate
Featuring:
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center
- Ilan Wurman, Associate Professor of Law, Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, Arizona State University
- [Moderator] Luke A. Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/48381568Thu, 20 Jan 2022 20:30:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn January 13, the Supreme Court stayed the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) COVID-19 vaccine-or-test mandate for large businesses, but allowed a vaccine mandate for staff at facilities receiving Medicare and Medicaid funding to...
Featuring:
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center
- Ilan Wurman, Associate Professor of Law, Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, Arizona State University
- [Moderator] Luke A. Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2930administrative law & regulatio,healthcare,regulatory transparency projec,supreme courtcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-206-intellectual-prope
Some argue that the waiver is a necessary measure that would give a boost to the global fight against COVID-19, but others contend it would do little to help defeat the current pandemic and could hinder future innovation. An expert panel joined us to discuss the proposed waiver and weigh the arguments on each side of the debate.

In October, members of RTP's Intellectual Property Working Group published a white paper on the same topic, which you can read here:
https://regproject.org/paper/covid-vaccine-ip-waiver-a-pathway-to-fewer-not-more-vaccines/

Featuring:
- Andrei Iancu, Partner, Irell & Manella LLP
- David Kappos, Partner, Cravath Swaine & Moore LLP
- Arti Rai, Elvin R. Latty Professor of Law, Duke University School of Law
- [Moderator] Saurabh Vishnubhakat, Professor of Law, Texas A&M University School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/48273046Wed, 12 Jan 2022 22:53:15 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn October 2020, India and South Africa filed a request at the World Trade Organization (WTO) to create an exemption from an international treaty known as TRIPS (Trade-Related aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) for technologies, drugs, and...
Some argue that the waiver is a necessary measure that would give a boost to the global fight against COVID-19, but others contend it would do little to help defeat the current pandemic and could hinder future innovation. An expert panel joined us to discuss the proposed waiver and weigh the arguments on each side of the debate.

In October, members of RTP's Intellectual Property Working Group published a white paper on the same topic, which you can read here:
https://regproject.org/paper/covid-vaccine-ip-waiver-a-pathway-to-fewer-not-more-vaccines/

Featuring:
- Andrei Iancu, Partner, Irell & Manella LLP
- David Kappos, Partner, Cravath Swaine & Moore LLP
- Arti Rai, Elvin R. Latty Professor of Law, Duke University School of Law
- [Moderator] Saurabh Vishnubhakat, Professor of Law, Texas A&M University School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>4051administrative law & regulatio,intellectual property,international law & trade,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-205-an-update-on-the-c
Under the Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency regulates greenhouse gas emissions from various sources including new cars and new industrial sources. But a large proportion of the country's greenhouse gas emissions come from existing sources, such as the nation's coal and natural gas power plants, which provide over half of American electricity.

In 2015, the Obama administration issued a regulation for existing fossil fuel power plants under Clean Air Act §111(d), which allows the EPA to “establish a procedure” for each state to adopt “standards of performance” for existing sources of air pollutants. The administration called this rule the "Clean Power Plan." It was controversial, in part, because it went beyond asking states to make their existing power plants run more efficiently. Instead, it went "beyond the fenceline" of the power plant to encourage non-fossil sources of electricity such as wind and solar power and shrink the fossil-fuel power sector.

The Clean Power Plan never went into effect because the Supreme Court stayed its implementation on February 9, 2016. The D.C. Circuit heard more than 7 hours of argument on the validity of the Clean Power Plan but never ruled on it because the Trump administration repealed it and replaced it with its own rule, which it called the "Affordable Clean Energy Rule," and was limited to promoting efficiency measures at existing fossil fuel plants. The D.C. Circuit then heard 9 more hours of argument on this new rule, before striking it down on January 19, 2021. The court held that EPA's authority was not so limited.

The Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether Clean Air Act §111(d) gives "the EPA authority not only to impose standards based on technology and methods that can be applied at and achieved by that existing source, but also allows the agency to develop industry-wide systems like cap-and-trade regimes." The case is an important sequel in the Court's lines of cases on how much deference executive agencies should receive to decide major questions of policy and whether Congress might authorize dramatic agency action from relatively obscure provisions—hiding an elephant in a mousehole.

Featuring:
- Jonathan Brightbill, Partner, Winston & Strawn LLP
- Kevin Poloncarz, Partner, Covington & Burling LLP
- [Moderator] James W. Coleman, Robert G. Storey Distinguished Faculty Fellow and 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/48026721Wed, 22 Dec 2021 17:45:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Supreme Court is now hearing the most closely watched environmental case in decades, which may decide the future of greenhouse gas regulation under the Clean Air Act. This case has already been the subject of an unprecedented Supreme Court stay...
Under the Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency regulates greenhouse gas emissions from various sources including new cars and new industrial sources. But a large proportion of the country's greenhouse gas emissions come from existing sources, such as the nation's coal and natural gas power plants, which provide over half of American electricity.

In 2015, the Obama administration issued a regulation for existing fossil fuel power plants under Clean Air Act §111(d), which allows the EPA to “establish a procedure” for each state to adopt “standards of performance” for existing sources of air pollutants. The administration called this rule the "Clean Power Plan." It was controversial, in part, because it went beyond asking states to make their existing power plants run more efficiently. Instead, it went "beyond the fenceline" of the power plant to encourage non-fossil sources of electricity such as wind and solar power and shrink the fossil-fuel power sector.

The Clean Power Plan never went into effect because the Supreme Court stayed its implementation on February 9, 2016. The D.C. Circuit heard more than 7 hours of argument on the validity of the Clean Power Plan but never ruled on it because the Trump administration repealed it and replaced it with its own rule, which it called the "Affordable Clean Energy Rule," and was limited to promoting efficiency measures at existing fossil fuel plants. The D.C. Circuit then heard 9 more hours of argument on this new rule, before striking it down on January 19, 2021. The court held that EPA's authority was not so limited.

The Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether Clean Air Act §111(d) gives "the EPA authority not only to impose standards based on technology and methods that can be applied at and achieved by that existing source, but also allows the agency to develop industry-wide systems like cap-and-trade regimes." The case is an important sequel in the Court's lines of cases on how much deference executive agencies should receive to decide major questions of policy and whether Congress might authorize dramatic agency action from relatively obscure provisions—hiding an elephant in a mousehole.

Featuring:
- Jonathan Brightbill, Partner, Winston & Strawn LLP
- Kevin Poloncarz, Partner, Covington & Burling LLP
- [Moderator] James W. Coleman, Robert G. Storey Distinguished Faculty Fellow and 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.]]>3792administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,litigation,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-31-the-regulation-of-e-cigaret
In June Jeff narrated an Explainer video on the same topic, which you can view here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2_brl2u9g0

Featuring:
- Jeff Stier, Senior Fellow, Consumer Choice Center

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/47874261Fri, 10 Dec 2021 21:15:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyHealth policy expert Jeff Stier joins the podcast to discuss all things concerning the regulation of e-cigarettes and vapes: How did the FDA get the authority to regulate tobacco in the first place? What is synthetic nicotine, and what might its...
In June Jeff narrated an Explainer video on the same topic, which you can view here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2_brl2u9g0

Featuring:
- Jeff Stier, Senior Fellow, Consumer Choice Center

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2152administrative law & regulatio,healthcare,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-204-the-ftc-in-the-cur
Featuring:
- Adam Cella, Attorney Advisor, Office of Hon. Christine Wilson, Federal Trade Commission
- Debbie Feinstein, Partner and Chair, Global Antitrust, Arnold & Porter
- Jessica Rich, Of Counsel, Kelley Drye; former Director, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission
- [Moderator] Svetlana Gans, Former Chief of Staff, Federal Trade Commission

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/47541583Thu, 18 Nov 2021 17:23:44 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe last few months have seen significant changes at the Federal Trade Commission. The new FTC has set an ambitious agenda that revives the agency, propelling it in directions we haven't previously seen. The FTC is poised to engage in wide-ranging...
Featuring:
- Adam Cella, Attorney Advisor, Office of Hon. Christine Wilson, Federal Trade Commission
- Debbie Feinstein, Partner and Chair, Global Antitrust, Arnold & Porter
- Jessica Rich, Of Counsel, Kelley Drye; former Director, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission
- [Moderator] Svetlana Gans, Former Chief of Staff, Federal Trade Commission

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3569administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-203-ftc-s-revolution-t
Featuring:
- Corbin Barthold, Director of Appellate Litigation and Internet Policy Counsel, TechFreedom
- William Blumenthal, Partner, Sidley Austin LLP
- Andrew Stivers, Associate Director, NERA Economic Consulting
- [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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/47313845Thu, 04 Nov 2021 15:20:49 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe FTC is undertaking an ambitious and historic effort to craft de novo competition and privacy rules that will impact the entire U.S. economy. While some have applauded FTC's efforts, others have questioned the FTC's statutory authority to craft...
Featuring:
- Corbin Barthold, Director of Appellate Litigation and Internet Policy Counsel, TechFreedom
- William Blumenthal, Partner, Sidley Austin LLP
- Andrew Stivers, Associate Director, NERA Economic Consulting
- [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.]]>3875administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-202-hud-and-the-dispar
Critics of Secretary Fudge's proposed rule, including Ranking Member Senator Pat Toomey, argue that the change not only flouts the Supreme Court's decision in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities but also ultimately hurt consumers. Proponents argue that the change will move the housing market towards greater equity. Our panel of experts with a diversity of views discussed the pros and cons on October 11, 2021.

Featuring:
- Paul Compton, Founding Partner, Compton Jones Dresher
- Morgan Williams, General Counsel, National Fair Housing Alliance
- [Moderator] Devon Westhill, President and General Counsel, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/47261415Mon, 01 Nov 2021 17:56:16 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn June 25, 2021, President Biden's newly appointed Housing Secretary Marcia Fudge proposed to rescind a Secretary Carson-era disparate impact rule designed to implement the Fair Housing Act. In its place, HUD would reinstate the 2013 Discriminatory...
Critics of Secretary Fudge's proposed rule, including Ranking Member Senator Pat Toomey, argue that the change not only flouts the Supreme Court's decision in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities but also ultimately hurt consumers. Proponents argue that the change will move the housing market towards greater equity. Our panel of experts with a diversity of views discussed the pros and cons on October 11, 2021.

Featuring:
- Paul Compton, Founding Partner, Compton Jones Dresher
- Morgan Williams, General Counsel, National Fair Housing Alliance
- [Moderator] Devon Westhill, President and General Counsel, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3079administrative law & regulatio,civil rights,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-201-fixing-food-an-fda
A twenty-seven-year veteran of the FDA's Center for Food Safety and Nutrition, Dr. Williams questions the accuracy of more than thirty years of food labeling, along with consumer education on diet/disease relationships and failed attempts to get consumers to track intakes.

Featuring:
- Dr. Richard A. Williams, Former Associate Director for Social Sciences, FDA; Author, "Fixing Food: An FDA Insider Unravels the Myths and Solutions"
- [Moderator] David Hyman, Scott K. Ginsburg Professor of Health Law & Policy, Georgetown University Law Center

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/47222588Fri, 29 Oct 2021 19:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Professor David Hyman interviews Dr. Richard Williams about Dr. Williams' new book, "Fixing Food: An FDA Insider Unravels the Myths and Solutions." A twenty-seven-year veteran of the FDA's Center for Food Safety and Nutrition, Dr....
A twenty-seven-year veteran of the FDA's Center for Food Safety and Nutrition, Dr. Williams questions the accuracy of more than thirty years of food labeling, along with consumer education on diet/disease relationships and failed attempts to get consumers to track intakes.

Featuring:
- Dr. Richard A. Williams, Former Associate Director for Social Sciences, FDA; Author, "Fixing Food: An FDA Insider Unravels the Myths and Solutions"
- [Moderator] David Hyman, Scott K. Ginsburg Professor of Health Law & Policy, Georgetown University Law Center

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3570administrative law & regulatio,healthcare,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-200-corporate-social-r
A distinguished panel joins us to discuss a new paper, titled "Corporate Collusion" and written by former U.S. Ambassador and White House Counsel C. Boyden Gray, and to offer their differing views on the legal issues involved, including ESG, ERISA requirements, fiduciary duty, and more.

Featuring:
- David J. Berger, Partner, Wilson Sonsini
- Hon. C. Boyden Gray, Founding Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates
- Hon. Hester Peirce, Commissioner, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
- Hon. Leo E. Strine, Jr., Of Counsel, Wachtell Lipton; former Chief Justice, Delaware Supreme Court
- [Moderator] Hon. Paul S. Atkins, Chief Executive Officer, Patomak Global Partners; former Commissioner, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/46962885Wed, 13 Oct 2021 20:29:53 +0000The Federalist SocietyEnvironmental, Social and Corporate Governance (ESG) investing is growing in popularity, especially after major investment firm BlackRock signaled support for what it called "ESG Integration," or the practice of incorporating material ESG information...
A distinguished panel joins us to discuss a new paper, titled "Corporate Collusion" and written by former U.S. Ambassador and White House Counsel C. Boyden Gray, and to offer their differing views on the legal issues involved, including ESG, ERISA requirements, fiduciary duty, and more.

Featuring:
- David J. Berger, Partner, Wilson Sonsini
- Hon. C. Boyden Gray, Founding Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates
- Hon. Hester Peirce, Commissioner, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
- Hon. Leo E. Strine, Jr., Of Counsel, Wachtell Lipton; former Chief Justice, Delaware Supreme Court
- [Moderator] Hon. Paul S. Atkins, Chief Executive Officer, Patomak Global Partners; former Commissioner, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>5412administrative law & regulatio,corporations,financial services,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-30-the-future-of-telem
Featuring:
- Josh Windham, Attorney, Institute for Justice
- [Moderator] Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/46942104Tue, 12 Oct 2021 17:07:35 +0000The Federalist SocietyDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, federal and state governments relaxed rules that limit telemedicine—technology that enables people to access healthcare from their phones and/or computers—to allow more patients to receive care from the convenience and...
Featuring:
- Josh Windham, Attorney, Institute for Justice
- [Moderator] Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1313administrative law & regulatio,healthcare,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-199-pass-or-fail-gradi
Featuring:
- David Fortney, Co-Founder, Fortney & Scott LLC, and former Chief Legal Officer, U.S. Department of Labor
- Leon Sequeira, Former Assistant Secretary of Labor for Policy, U.S. Department of Labor
- Glenn Taubman, Staff Attorney, National Right To Work Legal Defense Foundation
- [Moderator] Gregory Jacob, Partner, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, and former Counsel to Vice President Pence and Deputy Assistant to the President

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/46727983Tue, 28 Sep 2021 17:23:32 +0000The Federalist SocietyCollectively the Department of Labor, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the National Labor Relations Board play a pivotal role in almost every dimension of employment in the nation. This inaugural panel discusses recent developments in the...
Featuring:
- David Fortney, Co-Founder, Fortney & Scott LLC, and former Chief Legal Officer, U.S. Department of Labor
- Leon Sequeira, Former Assistant Secretary of Labor for Policy, U.S. Department of Labor
- Glenn Taubman, Staff Attorney, National Right To Work Legal Defense Foundation
- [Moderator] Gregory Jacob, Partner, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, and former Counsel to Vice President Pence and Deputy Assistant to the President

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3768administrative law & regulatio,labor & employment law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-198-eyes-to-the-sky-pr
The editor and two of the co-authors of "Eyes to the Sky: Privacy and Commerce in the Age of the Drone" joined us for a panel discussion of these legal and policy issues and more.

Featuring:
- Matthew Feeney, Director, Project on Emerging Technologies, Cato Institute
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- Gregory S. Walden, Partner, Dentons
- [Moderator] Gregory McNeal, Professor of Law and Public Policy, Pepperdine University and Co-Founder, AirMap

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/46604638Mon, 20 Sep 2021 16:35:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyDrones are rapidly becoming part of our everyday lives, and society will soon need to grapple with profound issues related to property, privacy, and nuisance. While drones are aircraft, the laws governing aircraft may soon be challenged as drones...
The editor and two of the co-authors of "Eyes to the Sky: Privacy and Commerce in the Age of the Drone" joined us for a panel discussion of these legal and policy issues and more.

Featuring:
- Matthew Feeney, Director, Project on Emerging Technologies, Cato Institute
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- Gregory S. Walden, Partner, Dentons
- [Moderator] Gregory McNeal, Professor of Law and Public Policy, Pepperdine University and Co-Founder, AirMap

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>4003administrative law & regulatio,property law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-197-competition-at-a-c
Featuring:
- Neil Averitt, Opinion Columnist, FTC:Watch
- Howard Beales, Professor Emeritus of Strategic Management and Public Policy, School of Business, The George Washington University
- Robert Bork, Jr., President, Antitrust Education Project
- Ioana Marinescu, Associate Professor, School of Social Policy & Practice, University of Pennsylvania and Faculty Research Fellow, National Bureau of Economic Research
- [Moderator] Jane Luxton, Managing Partner - Washington, D.C., Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/46461691Fri, 10 Sep 2021 15:36:57 +0000The Federalist SocietyProtecting and preserving competition are the key objectives of U.S. antitrust laws, which are all phrased as prohibitions: on agreements "in restraint of trade," of mergers and acquisitions where the effect "may be substantially to lessen...
Featuring:
- Neil Averitt, Opinion Columnist, FTC:Watch
- Howard Beales, Professor Emeritus of Strategic Management and Public Policy, School of Business, The George Washington University
- Robert Bork, Jr., President, Antitrust Education Project
- Ioana Marinescu, Associate Professor, School of Social Policy & Practice, University of Pennsylvania and Faculty Research Fellow, National Bureau of Economic Research
- [Moderator] Jane Luxton, Managing Partner - Washington, D.C., Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3803administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-196-brace-yourself-dis
Featuring:
- Michael D. Faucette, Associate, Wiley Rein
- Paul Helmke, Professor of Practice and Director, Civic Leaders Center, Paul H. O'Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University
- [Moderator] John Shu, Attorney and Legal Commentator

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/46435833Wed, 08 Sep 2021 23:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) in 2012 determined that forearm stabilizing braces for firearms serve a legitimate function and do not automatically subject a firearm to the strict requirements of the National Firearms...
Featuring:
- Michael D. Faucette, Associate, Wiley Rein
- Paul Helmke, Professor of Practice and Director, Civic Leaders Center, Paul H. O'Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University
- [Moderator] John Shu, Attorney and Legal Commentator

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3623administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,supreme courtcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-195-president-biden-s-
An expert panel joined us to break down the order and its implications for the apps it targets as well as for future relations between the United States and its foreign adversaries, such as China.

Featuring:
- Jennifer Hay, Senior Director for National Security Programs, DataRobot
- Jamil N. Jaffer, Founder & Executive Director, National Security Institute and Director, National Security Law & Policy Program and Assistant Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School
- Margaret Peterlin, Adjunct Lecturer, The Bush School of Government & Public Service, Texas A&M University
- [Moderator] Matthew Feeney, Director, Project on Emerging Technologies, Cato Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/46349284Thu, 02 Sep 2021 19:35:06 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn June, President Biden revoked a Trump-era executive order that sought to ban TikTok and WeChat, and replaced it with a new executive order directing the government to review the security threats posed by foreign-controlled software applications....
An expert panel joined us to break down the order and its implications for the apps it targets as well as for future relations between the United States and its foreign adversaries, such as China.

Featuring:
- Jennifer Hay, Senior Director for National Security Programs, DataRobot
- Jamil N. Jaffer, Founder & Executive Director, National Security Institute and Director, National Security Law & Policy Program and Assistant Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School
- Margaret Peterlin, Adjunct Lecturer, The Bush School of Government & Public Service, Texas A&M University
- [Moderator] Matthew Feeney, Director, Project on Emerging Technologies, Cato Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3711administrative law & regulatio,international & national secur,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-194-examining-the-cdcs
Following the CDC's first eviction moratorium, lawsuits were filed across the country. Many of them arguing that the federal government lacked the constitutional and statutory authority to stop state court eviction proceedings. As federal courts declared the CDC eviction moratorium unconstitutional and illegal, housing advocates rallied around the eviction moratorium in an effort to keep renters housed in their rental properties. And both sides – the private property owners and renters – all sought relief that never came from Congress and state legislatures. Many questions remain. In this virtual event, top experts dove deep into the CDC eviction moratorium, the legal issues, and the relief sought by both landlords and renters.

Featuring:
- Lawrence Gostin, University Professor, Founding Linda D. & Timothy J. O'Neill Professor of Global Health Law, Faculty Director of O'Neill Institute for National & Global Health Law, Georgetown University; Director, World Health Organization Collaborating Center on Public Health Law & Human Rights
- Luke Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- [Moderator] Kimberly Hermann, General Counsel, Southeastern Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/46236636Wed, 25 Aug 2021 18:17:40 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn September 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued its first nationwide eviction moratorium. Since then, the CDC renewed the moratorium several times and most recently issued a new eviction moratorium that is substantially...
Following the CDC's first eviction moratorium, lawsuits were filed across the country. Many of them arguing that the federal government lacked the constitutional and statutory authority to stop state court eviction proceedings. As federal courts declared the CDC eviction moratorium unconstitutional and illegal, housing advocates rallied around the eviction moratorium in an effort to keep renters housed in their rental properties. And both sides – the private property owners and renters – all sought relief that never came from Congress and state legislatures. Many questions remain. In this virtual event, top experts dove deep into the CDC eviction moratorium, the legal issues, and the relief sought by both landlords and renters.

Featuring:
- Lawrence Gostin, University Professor, Founding Linda D. & Timothy J. O'Neill Professor of Global Health Law, Faculty Director of O'Neill Institute for National & Global Health Law, Georgetown University; Director, World Health Organization Collaborating Center on Public Health Law & Human Rights
- Luke Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- [Moderator] Kimberly Hermann, General Counsel, Southeastern Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3810administrative law & regulatio,constitution,healthcare,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-193-arthrex-the-end-of
Some have criticized the PTAB's operations for significant due process problems and other "shenanigans," but others have defended the PTAB as serving an important function as a corrective mechanism for mistakenly-issued patents that undermine the efficient operation of the innovation economy. This panel of experts discussed Arthrex and the ultimate effects that it may have in patent law, administrative law, and the innovation economy.

Featuring:
- Gary Lawson, Philip S. Beck Professor of Law, Boston University School of Law
- Kristen Osenga, Austin E. Owen Research Scholar & Professor of Law, University of Richmond School of Law
- Jonathan Stroud, Chief IP Counsel, Unified Patents
- [Moderator] Jennifer Mascott, Assistant Professor of Law and Co-Executive Director, C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, Antonin Scalia Law School

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/46146776Wed, 18 Aug 2021 20:05:08 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe decision in United States v. Arthrex was extremely fractured, with a mix of majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions that cut across traditional jurisprudential divisions on the Supreme Court. Although the split majority held that the...
Some have criticized the PTAB's operations for significant due process problems and other "shenanigans," but others have defended the PTAB as serving an important function as a corrective mechanism for mistakenly-issued patents that undermine the efficient operation of the innovation economy. This panel of experts discussed Arthrex and the ultimate effects that it may have in patent law, administrative law, and the innovation economy.

Featuring:
- Gary Lawson, Philip S. Beck Professor of Law, Boston University School of Law
- Kristen Osenga, Austin E. Owen Research Scholar & Professor of Law, University of Richmond School of Law
- Jonathan Stroud, Chief IP Counsel, Unified Patents
- [Moderator] Jennifer Mascott, Assistant Professor of Law and Co-Executive Director, C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, Antonin Scalia Law School

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3780administrative law & regulatio,intellectual property,regulatory transparency projec,supreme courtcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-192-gender-based-board
The Ninth Circuit disagreed, allowing Meland's suit to go forward by finding that the practical effect of SB 826 was to govern shareholders and direct them to vote on the basis of gender to avoid the imposition of fines or penalties for noncompliance. The court further held that Meland's suit alleged a direct harm and did not rely on prudential standing since he alleged personal harm rather than injury to the corporate entity.

Here to discuss the merits of the underlying law and the likely next steps in the current litigation are Professor Ann Ravel of Berkeley Law, a former Commissioner and Chair at the Federal Election Commission, who helped negotiate a $310 million settlement against Google resulting in the creation of a corporate-level diversity, equity, and inclusion initiative, and Anastasia P. Boden, an attorney in Pacific Legal Foundation's Economic Liberty Project and lead counsel in the Meland v. Weber litigation. Our speakers are joined by moderator Megan Brown, a Partner at Wiley Rein LLP.

Featuring:
- Anastasia P. Boden, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- Ann Ravel, Lecturer, Berkeley Law and Former Commissioner and Chair, Federal Election Commission
- [Moderator] Megan Brown, Partner, Wiley Rein LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/46043147Tue, 10 Aug 2021 20:40:11 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn June 21, 2021, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled a shareholder-plaintiff had standing to sue California's Secretary of State. Creighton Meland, a shareholder at OSI Systems, Inc., sued alleging that Senate Bill 826, which was signed...
The Ninth Circuit disagreed, allowing Meland's suit to go forward by finding that the practical effect of SB 826 was to govern shareholders and direct them to vote on the basis of gender to avoid the imposition of fines or penalties for noncompliance. The court further held that Meland's suit alleged a direct harm and did not rely on prudential standing since he alleged personal harm rather than injury to the corporate entity.

Here to discuss the merits of the underlying law and the likely next steps in the current litigation are Professor Ann Ravel of Berkeley Law, a former Commissioner and Chair at the Federal Election Commission, who helped negotiate a $310 million settlement against Google resulting in the creation of a corporate-level diversity, equity, and inclusion initiative, and Anastasia P. Boden, an attorney in Pacific Legal Foundation's Economic Liberty Project and lead counsel in the Meland v. Weber litigation. Our speakers are joined by moderator Megan Brown, a Partner at Wiley Rein LLP.

Featuring:
- Anastasia P. Boden, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- Ann Ravel, Lecturer, Berkeley Law and Former Commissioner and Chair, Federal Election Commission
- [Moderator] Megan Brown, Partner, Wiley Rein LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3492administrative law & regulatio,civil rights,corporations,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-29-the-epas-methane-em
Featuring:
- Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law and Director, Coleman P. Burke Center for Environmental Law, Case Western Reserve University School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/45980300Thu, 05 Aug 2021 15:05:03 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn June, President Biden signed into law a bill that repealed changes to Environmental Protection Agency methane emissions regulations made by the Trump administration. In this episode, Professor Jonathan Adler joins the podcast to provide context to...
Featuring:
- Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law and Director, Coleman P. Burke Center for Environmental Law, Case Western Reserve University School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1074administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy lawcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-191-talks-with-authors
Featuring:
- Gail Heriot, Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law
- Maimon Schwarzschild, Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/45953845Tue, 03 Aug 2021 17:52:20 +0000The Federalist Society"A Dubious Expediency: How Race Preferences Damage Higher Education" is a collection of eight essays written by experts in the field examining and analyzing the impact of racial diversity preferences and identity politics in American colleges and...
Featuring:
- Gail Heriot, Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law
- Maimon Schwarzschild, Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3748administrative law & regulatio,affirmative action,education policycleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-190-the-implications-o
This latest cycle of CRA actions merit general exploration as well as consideration of the specific rules at issue. What process did Congress use to disapprove the three rules? Why did it use the CRA relatively sparingly this year, and what will the impact be of the three disapprovals? The answers to the last two questions are arguably related. When Congress uses the CRA to repeal federal regulations, the respective agencies are automatically barred from issuing another rule that is "substantially the same" as the one disapproved without new statutory authorization. Though there is no court ruling on what the CRA's anti-circumvention clause means, the resulting uncertainty may have skewed the CRA's use in interesting ways.

In this live podcast, Todd Gaziano and Professor Jonathan Adler discuss the CRA, how it has been used, and the ramifications of its use on the three rules this year and on future federal regulations.

Featuring:
- Todd F. Gaziano, Chief of Legal Policy and Strategic Research and Director, Center for the Separation of Powers, Pacific Legal Foundation
- Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law, Director of the Center for Business Law & Regulation, Case Western Reserve University School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/45762685Mon, 19 Jul 2021 22:46:50 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Congressional Review Act (CRA) was used in 2017 to overturn 15 rules issued near the end of the Obama administration. The shift in political control in the White House and Congress this year set the stage for a possible repeat with respect to...
This latest cycle of CRA actions merit general exploration as well as consideration of the specific rules at issue. What process did Congress use to disapprove the three rules? Why did it use the CRA relatively sparingly this year, and what will the impact be of the three disapprovals? The answers to the last two questions are arguably related. When Congress uses the CRA to repeal federal regulations, the respective agencies are automatically barred from issuing another rule that is "substantially the same" as the one disapproved without new statutory authorization. Though there is no court ruling on what the CRA's anti-circumvention clause means, the resulting uncertainty may have skewed the CRA's use in interesting ways.

In this live podcast, Todd Gaziano and Professor Jonathan Adler discuss the CRA, how it has been used, and the ramifications of its use on the three rules this year and on future federal regulations.

Featuring:
- Todd F. Gaziano, Chief of Legal Policy and Strategic Research and Director, Center for the Separation of Powers, Pacific Legal Foundation
- Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law, Director of the Center for Business Law & Regulation, Case Western Reserve University School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3952administrative law & regulatio,politics,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-189-a-dawning-era-for-
Featuring:
- Steve Cernak, Partner, Bona Law PC
- Michael Kades, Director, Markets and Competition Policy, Equitable Growth
- Bruce Kobayashi, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
- Thomas Lambert, Wall Chair in Corporate Law and Governance and Professor of Law, University of Missouri School of Law
- Taylor Owings, Partner, Baker Botts L.L.P.
- [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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/45709576Thu, 15 Jul 2021 16:01:57 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe antitrust agencies' approach to vertical mergers has been the subject of significant debate — with potential changes still on the horizon. Last summer, the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission issued long-awaited Vertical Merger...
Featuring:
- Steve Cernak, Partner, Bona Law PC
- Michael Kades, Director, Markets and Competition Policy, Equitable Growth
- Bruce Kobayashi, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
- Thomas Lambert, Wall Chair in Corporate Law and Governance and Professor of Law, University of Missouri School of Law
- Taylor Owings, Partner, Baker Botts L.L.P.
- [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.]]>4777administrative law & regulatio,corporations,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-188-immigration-policy
Now that regulation is the primary means for immigration lawmaking, scholars, judges, and government officials have begun debating the proper regulatory processes for promulgating major immigration policy. In her book Beyond Deportation, for example, Professor Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia has examined the value of rulemaking over agency guidance for major immigration policy and related relief. In a recent coauthored Duke Law Journal article, Professor Christopher Walker has joined Professor Wadhia to argue that the Biden Administration should shift the immigration policymaking default from administrative adjudication to notice-and-comment rulemaking (and not seek Chevron deference in immigration adjudication).

In this episode, an expert panel explores these arguments regarding the appropriate regulatory process for immigration policymaking and how the Biden Administration (and the federal courts) have already started to take up this call to action. Professors Wadhia and Walker are joined by Professors Susan Dudley and Richard Pierce, both of whom have deep expertise in administrative law and regulatory process.

Featuring:
- Richard Pierce, Lyle T. Alverson Professor of Law, George Washington University Law School
- Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia, Associate Dean for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, Samuel Weiss Faculty Scholar and Clinical Professor of Law, and Director, Center for Immigrants' Rights Clinic, The Pennsylvania State University
- Christopher Walker, Professor of Law, Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State University
- [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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/45697577Wed, 14 Jul 2021 19:29:15 +0000The Federalist SocietyMotivated in part by Congress's failure to modernize immigration policy in the United States, Presidents in recent years have turned to administrative law and the regulatory process to make major immigration policy. The Obama Administration's DACA and...
Now that regulation is the primary means for immigration lawmaking, scholars, judges, and government officials have begun debating the proper regulatory processes for promulgating major immigration policy. In her book Beyond Deportation, for example, Professor Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia has examined the value of rulemaking over agency guidance for major immigration policy and related relief. In a recent coauthored Duke Law Journal article, Professor Christopher Walker has joined Professor Wadhia to argue that the Biden Administration should shift the immigration policymaking default from administrative adjudication to notice-and-comment rulemaking (and not seek Chevron deference in immigration adjudication).

In this episode, an expert panel explores these arguments regarding the appropriate regulatory process for immigration policymaking and how the Biden Administration (and the federal courts) have already started to take up this call to action. Professors Wadhia and Walker are joined by Professors Susan Dudley and Richard Pierce, both of whom have deep expertise in administrative law and regulatory process.

Featuring:
- Richard Pierce, Lyle T. Alverson Professor of Law, George Washington University Law School
- Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia, Associate Dean for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, Samuel Weiss Faculty Scholar and Clinical Professor of Law, and Director, Center for Immigrants' Rights Clinic, The Pennsylvania State University
- Christopher Walker, Professor of Law, Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State University
- [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.]]>3660administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-187-courthouse-steps-dIn this episode, attorney Wen Fa analyzes the decision and its implications.
Featuring:

Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/45627871Thu, 08 Jul 2021 16:39:01 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Supreme Court issued its decision in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid on June 23, 2021, holding 6-3 that a California regulation allowing California union organizers entry onto the private property of California growers constituted an uncompensated...In this episode, attorney Wen Fa analyzes the decision and its implications.
Featuring:

Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1454administrative law & regulatio,property law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-186-teaching-about-rac
Featuring:
- John Agresto, Former President, St. John's College
- Peter Wood, President, National Association of Scholars
- [Moderator] Linda Chavez, Chairman, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/45617616Wed, 07 Jul 2021 19:30:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThis episode features a panel discussion on Critical Race Theory, the 1619 Project and the current debates over how best to teach American history. Linda Chavez, Chairman of the Center for Equal Opportunity moderates the program and is joined by...
Featuring:
- John Agresto, Former President, St. John's College
- Peter Wood, President, National Association of Scholars
- [Moderator] Linda Chavez, Chairman, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3931administrative law & regulatio,education policy,founding era & history,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-28-rep-harshbarger-on-
Featuring:
- Rep. Diana Harshbarger, United States Representative, Tennessee
- [Moderator] Shoshana Weissmann, Senior Manager of Digital Media and Fellow, R Street Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/45603015Tue, 06 Jul 2021 19:39:50 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn May 2021, Rep. Diana Harshbarger (R-Tenneessee) introduced the "Freedom to Work Act," a bill that would utilize the federal government to reduce occupational licensing requirements. In this episode, the Congresswoman joins Shoshana Weissmann to...
Featuring:
- Rep. Diana Harshbarger, United States Representative, Tennessee
- [Moderator] Shoshana Weissmann, Senior Manager of Digital Media and Fellow, R Street Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1837administrative law & regulatio,labor & employment law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-185-sec-v-ripple-labs-
While the SEC has declared that Bitcoin and Ether, the two largest cryptocurrencies, are not securities, the agency has increasingly brought lawsuits arguing that other coins must be registered as securities, relying on New Deal-era statutes and the Supreme Court's 1946 Howey test. Most notably, the SEC recently filed suit against Ripple Labs claiming that XRP, the popular cryptocurrency Ripple launched almost a decade ago, is an unregistered securities offering.
In this live podcast, an expert panel discusses SEC v. Ripple Labs, the broader cryptocurrency regulatory landscape, and potential legislative and regulatory reforms.

Featuring:
- John Berlau, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute
- John Deaton, Managing Partner, Deaton Law Firm
- Carol Goforth, University Professor and Clayton N. Little Professor of Law, University of Arkansas School of Law
- Roslyn Layton, Founder, China Tech Threat; Visiting Researcher, Aalborg University Center for Communication, Media, and Information Technologies; Senior Contributor, Forbes
- [Moderator] Curt Levey, President, Committee for Justice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/45496732Tue, 29 Jun 2021 17:30:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn recent years, a number of regulatory agencies have increasingly utilized enforcement actions rather than formal rulemaking to achieve desired policy outcomes. Critics argue that this "regulation by enforcement" raises legal concerns involving fair...
While the SEC has declared that Bitcoin and Ether, the two largest cryptocurrencies, are not securities, the agency has increasingly brought lawsuits arguing that other coins must be registered as securities, relying on New Deal-era statutes and the Supreme Court's 1946 Howey test. Most notably, the SEC recently filed suit against Ripple Labs claiming that XRP, the popular cryptocurrency Ripple launched almost a decade ago, is an unregistered securities offering.
In this live podcast, an expert panel discusses SEC v. Ripple Labs, the broader cryptocurrency regulatory landscape, and potential legislative and regulatory reforms.

Featuring:
- John Berlau, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute
- John Deaton, Managing Partner, Deaton Law Firm
- Carol Goforth, University Professor and Clayton N. Little Professor of Law, University of Arkansas School of Law
- Roslyn Layton, Founder, China Tech Threat; Visiting Researcher, Aalborg University Center for Communication, Media, and Information Technologies; Senior Contributor, Forbes
- [Moderator] Curt Levey, President, Committee for Justice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3705administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-184-federalism-or-a-fe
The Biden Administration has proposed to rescind two actions of the Trump Administration — EPA's withdrawal of a Clean Air Act waiver of preemption, and a Department of Transportation preemption regulation — that together attempt to establish one preemptive, national standard for automobile fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions by the NHTSA and EPA and, as a consequence, prohibit California from adopting or enforcing motor vehicle greenhouse gas emissions or zero-emitting vehicle requirements for motor vehicles under state law.

In this live podcast, a panel of lawyers involved in the litigation discuss the legal and policy issues presented by these proposals.

Featuring:
- Jonathan Brightbill, Partner, Winston & Strawn LLP
- Sean H. Donahue, Partner, Donahue, Goldberg & Weaver LLP
- Benjamin Flowers, Solicitor General, Ohio
- [Moderator] James Coleman, 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/45481237Mon, 28 Jun 2021 16:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyFederal and state government authority to mandate automobile manufacturers and consumers switch to electric cars is one of the most contentious legal and policy debates of the last two decades. The Biden Administration has proposed to rescind two...
The Biden Administration has proposed to rescind two actions of the Trump Administration — EPA's withdrawal of a Clean Air Act waiver of preemption, and a Department of Transportation preemption regulation — that together attempt to establish one preemptive, national standard for automobile fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions by the NHTSA and EPA and, as a consequence, prohibit California from adopting or enforcing motor vehicle greenhouse gas emissions or zero-emitting vehicle requirements for motor vehicles under state law.

In this live podcast, a panel of lawyers involved in the litigation discuss the legal and policy issues presented by these proposals.

Featuring:
- Jonathan Brightbill, Partner, Winston & Strawn LLP
- Sean H. Donahue, Partner, Donahue, Goldberg & Weaver LLP
- Benjamin Flowers, Solicitor General, Ohio
- [Moderator] James Coleman, 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.]]>3684administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,federalism & separation of pow,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-183-the-path-forward-o
In this episode, experts conduct a lively discussion of agency guidance – what it is, how and why it is issued, pros and cons of current guidance practices, thoughts on reforms in E.O. 13891, and the potential future of guidance reform.

Featuring:
- Bridget Dooling, Research Professor, George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center
- Paul Ray, Senior Advisor, Patomak Global Partners
- [Moderator] Daniel Flores, Senior Counsel, Committee on Oversight and Reform, U.S. House of Representatives

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/45444221Fri, 25 Jun 2021 17:50:24 +0000The Federalist SocietyOver the past decade or so, increasing attention has been paid to agency guidance, the role it serves, and whether it has begun to supplant legally binding regulation as a governing tool. To place more parameters around its use, President Trump issued...
In this episode, experts conduct a lively discussion of agency guidance – what it is, how and why it is issued, pros and cons of current guidance practices, thoughts on reforms in E.O. 13891, and the potential future of guidance reform.

Featuring:
- Bridget Dooling, Research Professor, George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center
- Paul Ray, Senior Advisor, Patomak Global Partners
- [Moderator] Daniel Flores, Senior Counsel, Committee on Oversight and Reform, U.S. House of Representatives

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3792administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-182-cybersecurity-thre
And that's just the first six months. What has been the fallout from these events and how is the administration responding? The calls for regulation of critical infrastructure, of cryptocurrency, and for aggressive retaliation have never been louder. Which will have a long-term impact?

In this live podcast, Stewart Baker and Tatyana Bolton trade insights on this pressing topic.

Featuring:
- Stewart Baker, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
- Tatyana Bolton, Director, Cybersecurity and Emerging Threats, R Street Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/45431770Thu, 24 Jun 2021 21:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Biden administration had barely named a cabinet, let alone staffed the government, when it began taking cybersecurity hits from all directions. The Russian government was revealed to have carried out a sophisticated supply chain attack through...
And that's just the first six months. What has been the fallout from these events and how is the administration responding? The calls for regulation of critical infrastructure, of cryptocurrency, and for aggressive retaliation have never been louder. Which will have a long-term impact?

In this live podcast, Stewart Baker and Tatyana Bolton trade insights on this pressing topic.

Featuring:
- Stewart Baker, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
- Tatyana Bolton, Director, Cybersecurity and Emerging Threats, R Street Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3844administrative law & regulatio,security & privacycleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-181-state-of-emergency
In March 2020, Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear declared a state of emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Since then, he and other executive branch officials have issued executive orders, regulations, and other directives aimed at combatting the spread of the virus. On February 2 of this year, Kentucky's General Assembly enacted a series of bills — over Governor Beshear's vetoes — that amended the Commonwealth's emergency powers laws. Under those laws, executive emergency orders that restrict private entities like businesses and churches lapse automatically after 30 days unless extended with the agreement of the legislature. Without legislative action, the Governor's existing orders lapsed on March 4, 2021. The Governor maintains, however, that the new laws invade the executive's authority to respond to emergencies and that he may continue to enforce emergency orders.

Two lawsuits followed. First, Governor Beshear sued the leaders of Kentucky's legislature and the Attorney General and asked the court to declare that the new laws usurp his executive powers. Separately, Pacific Legal Foundation sued the Governor on behalf of three restaurant owners who challenge the Governor's authority to continue the enforcement of business restrictions after March 4.

The judges in each case issued temporary injunctions. In the Governor's case, a Franklin County judge suspended certain provisions of the new laws. In PLF's case, a Scott County judge ordered the Governor to cease enforcement of orders against PLF's clients. The order in the latter case has been put on hold, and both cases have been appealed. The Kentucky Supreme Court accepted "transfer" from the appellate court and ordered that the two cases be heard together.

Governor Beshear has announced the easing of restrictions, effective June 11. The parties dispute whether this latest directive from the Governor renders the case moot.

In this live podcast, Mitchel Denham (DBL Law) and Oliver Dunford (Pacific Legal Foundation) debate and discuss the implications of these cases.

Featuring:
- Mitchel Denham, Partner, DBL Law
- Oliver Dunford, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/45397938Tue, 22 Jun 2021 14:30:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn June 10, the Kentucky Supreme Court heard a pair of cases to consider whether and to what extent the Commonwealth's legislature may set parameters on the Governor's exercise of emergency powers. In March 2020, Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear...
In March 2020, Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear declared a state of emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Since then, he and other executive branch officials have issued executive orders, regulations, and other directives aimed at combatting the spread of the virus. On February 2 of this year, Kentucky's General Assembly enacted a series of bills — over Governor Beshear's vetoes — that amended the Commonwealth's emergency powers laws. Under those laws, executive emergency orders that restrict private entities like businesses and churches lapse automatically after 30 days unless extended with the agreement of the legislature. Without legislative action, the Governor's existing orders lapsed on March 4, 2021. The Governor maintains, however, that the new laws invade the executive's authority to respond to emergencies and that he may continue to enforce emergency orders.

Two lawsuits followed. First, Governor Beshear sued the leaders of Kentucky's legislature and the Attorney General and asked the court to declare that the new laws usurp his executive powers. Separately, Pacific Legal Foundation sued the Governor on behalf of three restaurant owners who challenge the Governor's authority to continue the enforcement of business restrictions after March 4.

The judges in each case issued temporary injunctions. In the Governor's case, a Franklin County judge suspended certain provisions of the new laws. In PLF's case, a Scott County judge ordered the Governor to cease enforcement of orders against PLF's clients. The order in the latter case has been put on hold, and both cases have been appealed. The Kentucky Supreme Court accepted "transfer" from the appellate court and ordered that the two cases be heard together.

Governor Beshear has announced the easing of restrictions, effective June 11. The parties dispute whether this latest directive from the Governor renders the case moot.

In this live podcast, Mitchel Denham (DBL Law) and Oliver Dunford (Pacific Legal Foundation) debate and discuss the implications of these cases.

Featuring:
- Mitchel Denham, Partner, DBL Law
- Oliver Dunford, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3832administrative law & regulatio,federalism & separation of pow,litigation,state courts,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-180-book-review-admini
In this episode, Professor Wurman and Professor Richard Epstein discuss the new casebook and its theory of administrative power.

Featuring:
- Ilan Wurman, Associate Professor of Law, Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, Arizona State University
- [Moderator] Richard A. Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/45250198Thu, 10 Jun 2021 17:53:22 +0000The Federalist SocietyWith his new casebook, "Administrative Law Theory and Fundamentals: An Integrated Approach," Professor Ilan Wurman seeks to provide fresh thinking to the field of administrative law. In the casebook, Professor Wurman proposes a theory of...
In this episode, Professor Wurman and Professor Richard Epstein discuss the new casebook and its theory of administrative power.

Featuring:
- Ilan Wurman, Associate Professor of Law, Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, Arizona State University
- [Moderator] Richard A. Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3620administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,separation of powerscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-27-occupational-regulahttps://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview/vol54/iss1/2/)

Featuring:
- Daniel Greenberg, President, Advance Arkansas Institute
- [Moderator] Anastasia P. Boden, Attorney, Economic Liberty Project, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/45217734Tue, 08 Jun 2021 17:12:48 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Anastasia P. Boden interviews Daniel Greenberg about his new article, "Regulating Glamour: A Quantitative Analysis of the Health and Safety Training of Appearance Professionals."...https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview/vol54/iss1/2/)

Featuring:
- Daniel Greenberg, President, Advance Arkansas Institute
- [Moderator] Anastasia P. Boden, Attorney, Economic Liberty Project, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1632administrative law & regulatio,labor & employment law,regulatory transparency projec,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-26-land-use-restrictio
Featuring:
- Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Southeastern Legal Foundation
- Emily Hamilton, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- [Moderator] Kimberly Hermann, General Counsel, Southeastern Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/44896786Tue, 18 May 2021 18:24:01 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn a conversation moderated by Kimberly Hermann, Braden Boucek and Emily Hamilton discuss several proposed legislative reforms to land use restrictions. Featuring: - Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Southeastern Legal Foundation - Emily...
Featuring:
- Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Southeastern Legal Foundation
- Emily Hamilton, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- [Moderator] Kimberly Hermann, General Counsel, Southeastern Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1744administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-179-artificial-intelli
Unlike some humans, AI models don't have malevolent biases or an intention to discriminate. Are they superior to human decision-making in that sense? Nonetheless, it is well established that AI systems can have a disparate impact on various identity groups. Because AI learns by detecting correlations and other patterns in a real world dataset, are disparate impacts inevitable, short of requiring AI systems to produce proportionate results? Would prohibiting certain kinds of correlations degrade the accuracy of AI models? For example, in a bail determination system, would an AI model which learns that men are more likely to be repeat offenders produce less accurate results if it were prohibited from taking gender into account?

Featuring:
- Stewart A. Baker, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
- Nicholas Weaver, Researcher, International Computer Science Institute and Lecturer, UC Berkeley
- [Moderator] Curt Levey, President, Committee for Justice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/44875771Mon, 17 May 2021 17:22:39 +0000The Federalist SocietyIt is hard to find a discussion of artificial intelligence these days that does not include concerns about Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems' potential bias against racial minorities and other identity groups. Facial recognition, lending, and bail...
Unlike some humans, AI models don't have malevolent biases or an intention to discriminate. Are they superior to human decision-making in that sense? Nonetheless, it is well established that AI systems can have a disparate impact on various identity groups. Because AI learns by detecting correlations and other patterns in a real world dataset, are disparate impacts inevitable, short of requiring AI systems to produce proportionate results? Would prohibiting certain kinds of correlations degrade the accuracy of AI models? For example, in a bail determination system, would an AI model which learns that men are more likely to be repeat offenders produce less accurate results if it were prohibited from taking gender into account?

Featuring:
- Stewart A. Baker, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
- Nicholas Weaver, Researcher, International Computer Science Institute and Lecturer, UC Berkeley
- [Moderator] Curt Levey, President, Committee for Justice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3392administrative law & regulatio,civil rights,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-178-un-civil-war-the-f
Featuring:
- Joshua D. Wright, Executive Director, Global Antitrust Institute, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University
- John Yun, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University
- [Introduction] Sydney Dominguez, President, The Federalist Society's George Mason Student Chapter

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/44754197Tue, 11 May 2021 14:51:42 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn April 22, 2021, the Federalist Society's George Mason Student Chapter, the Regulatory Transparency Project, and the Global Antitrust Institute cosponsored an event featuring professors Joshua D. Wright and John Yun discussing the future of the...
Featuring:
- Joshua D. Wright, Executive Director, Global Antitrust Institute, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University
- John Yun, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University
- [Introduction] Sydney Dominguez, President, The Federalist Society's George Mason Student Chapter

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>5306administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-25-president-bidens-me
Featuring:
- J. Kennerly Davis, Jr., Former Senior Attorney, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/44738806Mon, 10 May 2021 17:02:26 +0000The Federalist SocietyKen Davis joined the podcast to discuss why and how President Biden's memo on Modernizing Regulatory Review could significantly alter the regulatory review process. Featuring: - J. Kennerly Davis, Jr., Former Senior Attorney, Hunton Andrews Kurth...
Featuring:
- J. Kennerly Davis, Jr., Former Senior Attorney, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1329administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/patents-and-pandemics-innovation-policy-
On the one hand, advocates for the waiver argue that patents have been a blockade for patient access and created higher prices, especially in developing countries. On the other hand, opponents of the waiver maintain that there is no evidence that patents are blocking drug development or distribution for the COVID-19 pandemic. The opponents also maintain that patents made possible over the past several decades the R&D investments, the creation of technical know-how, and the commercial agreements that have been the launching pad for the unprecedented development of several vaccines and other medical treatments in less than a year.

This live podcast features experts in innovation policy on both sides of the issue debating the role of patents in medical care and how the United States should respond to the waiver petition.

Featuring:
- Richard Blaylock, Partner, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
- Brian O'Shaughnessy, Partner, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP and Past President, Licensing Executives Society, USA & Canada
- Hans Sauer, Deputy General Counsel and Vice President for Intellectual Property, Biotechnology Industry Organization
- [Moderator] Paul R. Michel, Chief Judge (ret.), U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/44667432Thu, 06 May 2021 19:37:14 +0000The Federalist SocietyIndia and South Africa have submitted a petition to the World Trade Organization seeking a waiver of all intellectual property rights under international treaties on drugs, vaccines, or other responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. This waiver petition...
On the one hand, advocates for the waiver argue that patents have been a blockade for patient access and created higher prices, especially in developing countries. On the other hand, opponents of the waiver maintain that there is no evidence that patents are blocking drug development or distribution for the COVID-19 pandemic. The opponents also maintain that patents made possible over the past several decades the R&D investments, the creation of technical know-how, and the commercial agreements that have been the launching pad for the unprecedented development of several vaccines and other medical treatments in less than a year.

This live podcast features experts in innovation policy on both sides of the issue debating the role of patents in medical care and how the United States should respond to the waiver petition.

Featuring:
- Richard Blaylock, Partner, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
- Brian O'Shaughnessy, Partner, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP and Past President, Licensing Executives Society, USA & Canada
- Hans Sauer, Deputy General Counsel and Vice President for Intellectual Property, Biotechnology Industry Organization
- [Moderator] Paul R. Michel, Chief Judge (ret.), U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3724administrative law & regulatio,foreign policy,healthcare,intellectual propertycleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-176-courthouse-steps-d
A panel of experts will discuss the ruling and its implications.

Featuring:
- Alden Abbott, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- Corbin Barthold, Director of Appellate Litigation and Internet Policy Counsel, TechFreedom
- Maureen Ohlhausen, Partner, Baker Botts LLP
- [Moderator] Asheesh Agarwal, Deputy General Counsel, TechFreedom

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/44631377Tue, 04 May 2021 19:45:59 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn April 22, 2021, the Supreme Court decided AMG Capital Management, LLC v. Federal Trade Commission. Writing for the unanimous Court, Justice Breyer explained how Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act does not authorize the FTC to seek,...
A panel of experts will discuss the ruling and its implications.

Featuring:
- Alden Abbott, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- Corbin Barthold, Director of Appellate Litigation and Internet Policy Counsel, TechFreedom
- Maureen Ohlhausen, Partner, Baker Botts LLP
- [Moderator] Asheesh Agarwal, Deputy General Counsel, TechFreedom

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3386administrative law & regulatiocleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-24-the-future-of-title
Featuring:
- Edward E. Bartlett, President, SAVE
- [Moderator] Linda Chavez, Chairman, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/44578968Fri, 30 Apr 2021 21:08:17 +0000The Federalist SocietyEdward E. Bartlett and Linda Chavez join the podcast to discuss the future of Title IX implementation under the Biden administration, which could have significant ramifications on college campuses across the country. Featuring: - Edward E....
Featuring:
- Edward E. Bartlett, President, SAVE
- [Moderator] Linda Chavez, Chairman, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1854administrative law & regulatio,civil rights,due process,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-175
In addition to these economic considerations, Big Tech has raised a host of social and political concerns over speech, democracy, and power. Is Big Tech suppressing speech? Should it suppress more speech? Does it even matter if private companies “suppress speech”? Does Big Tech have too much control over our elections or none at all? What power does Big Tech wield over our lives, if any?

On April 15, 2021, the Federalist Society's Chicago Lawyers Chapter hosted a panel of antitrust experts to discuss these issues and more.

Featuring:
- Asheesh Agarwal, Deputy General Counsel, TechFreedom
- Jessica Melugin, Director, Center for Technology and Innovation, Competitive Enterprise Institute
- Hal Singer, Managing Director, Econ One Research
- [Moderator] Richard A. Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law
- [Introduction] John Adams, Stakeholder, Eimer Stahl LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/44559644Thu, 29 Apr 2021 17:16:19 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe debate over “Big Tech” and antitrust has intensified. On one side are those who consider certain Big Tech companies monopolies that reduce competition and exploit their users’ data. On the other side are those who believe that competition in the...
In addition to these economic considerations, Big Tech has raised a host of social and political concerns over speech, democracy, and power. Is Big Tech suppressing speech? Should it suppress more speech? Does it even matter if private companies “suppress speech”? Does Big Tech have too much control over our elections or none at all? What power does Big Tech wield over our lives, if any?

On April 15, 2021, the Federalist Society's Chicago Lawyers Chapter hosted a panel of antitrust experts to discuss these issues and more.

Featuring:
- Asheesh Agarwal, Deputy General Counsel, TechFreedom
- Jessica Melugin, Director, Center for Technology and Innovation, Competitive Enterprise Institute
- Hal Singer, Managing Director, Econ One Research
- [Moderator] Richard A. Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law
- [Introduction] John Adams, Stakeholder, Eimer Stahl LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>4460administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrust,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-174-legal-issues-for-c
In the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act, Congress asked the GAO to study and report on the roles of federal, state, and local authorities in the regulation of drone operations. That GAO report was released in September 2020 and noted the complicated caselaw surrounding low-altitude airspace. Meanwhile, many states and cities are passing drone laws, including drone no-fly zones. Some recent state bills propose leasing airspace above public roads to drone companies. Many in the drone industry and at the FAA, however, dispute the authority of states to regulate this area.
In this live podcast, experts debate these issues and more.

Featuring:
- Diana Marina Cooper, Head of U.S. Policy, Hyundai Urban Air Mobility
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/44548056Wed, 28 Apr 2021 21:45:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyCommercial drone technology advanced rapidly in the past decade, and companies like Walmart, Amazon, Verizon, CVS, and UPS are now actively testing drone services like home delivery, medical logistics, and infrastructure inspections. These drones fly...
In the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act, Congress asked the GAO to study and report on the roles of federal, state, and local authorities in the regulation of drone operations. That GAO report was released in September 2020 and noted the complicated caselaw surrounding low-altitude airspace. Meanwhile, many states and cities are passing drone laws, including drone no-fly zones. Some recent state bills propose leasing airspace above public roads to drone companies. Many in the drone industry and at the FAA, however, dispute the authority of states to regulate this area.
In this live podcast, experts debate these issues and more.

Featuring:
- Diana Marina Cooper, Head of U.S. Policy, Hyundai Urban Air Mobility
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3413administrative law & regulatio,federalism,property law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-173-the-state-of-healt
Featuring:
- M. Gregg Bloche, Carmack Waterhouse Professor of Health Law, Policy, and Ethics, Georgetown University
- Lawrence Gostin, University Professor and Director, O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown University
- David A. Hyman, Scott K. Ginsburg Professor of Health Law & Policy, Georgetown University
- Timothy M. Westmoreland, Professor from Practice, Georgetown University
- [Moderator] Patrick Lyons, Co-President, The Federalist Society's Georgetown Student Chapter

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/44537319Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:13:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn Friday, April 16, 2021, the Federalist Society's Georgetown Student Chapter hosted a webinar featuring professors Gregg Bloche, Larry Gostin, David Hyman, and Timothy Westmoreland discussing the current state of healthcare policy in the United...
Featuring:
- M. Gregg Bloche, Carmack Waterhouse Professor of Health Law, Policy, and Ethics, Georgetown University
- Lawrence Gostin, University Professor and Director, O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown University
- David A. Hyman, Scott K. Ginsburg Professor of Health Law & Policy, Georgetown University
- Timothy M. Westmoreland, Professor from Practice, Georgetown University
- [Moderator] Patrick Lyons, Co-President, The Federalist Society's Georgetown Student Chapter

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3633administrative law & regulatio,healthcarecleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-172-third-party-paymen
Some view these third-party payments in government litigation settlements as an unconstitutional encroachment on Congress's spending power that should remain proscribed, but some see them as a legitimate measure to advance policy goals, particularly when it comes to environmental enforcement.

On April 14, the Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project and Practice Groups hosted a webinar featuring experts on both sides of the issue discussing the practice and whether it will – and should – be utilized once again by the new administration.

Featuring:
- Ryan Dean Newman, Former Acting Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Policy, United States Department of Justice
- Justin A. Savage, Global Co-Lead, Environmental Team, Sidley Austin LLP
- John Shu, Attorney and Legal Commentator
- [Moderator] Annie Donaldson Talley, Partner, Luther Strange and Associates

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/44426419Wed, 21 Apr 2021 18:58:02 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn June of 2017, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a memo prohibiting the Department of Justice from directing settlement payments to non-governmental third parties that are "neither victims nor parties to the lawsuits" when the Department is...
Some view these third-party payments in government litigation settlements as an unconstitutional encroachment on Congress's spending power that should remain proscribed, but some see them as a legitimate measure to advance policy goals, particularly when it comes to environmental enforcement.

On April 14, the Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project and Practice Groups hosted a webinar featuring experts on both sides of the issue discussing the practice and whether it will – and should – be utilized once again by the new administration.

Featuring:
- Ryan Dean Newman, Former Acting Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Policy, United States Department of Justice
- Justin A. Savage, Global Co-Lead, Environmental Team, Sidley Austin LLP
- John Shu, Attorney and Legal Commentator
- [Moderator] Annie Donaldson Talley, Partner, Luther Strange and Associates

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3601administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,litigation,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-171-courthouse-steps-o
Joshua Wright, a former commissioner at the Federal Trade Commission, joined us to discuss oral arguments and the potential implications of the case.

Featuring:
- Joshua D. Wright, Executive Director, Global Antitrust Institute, 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/44303992Mon, 12 Apr 2021 15:19:05 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn March 31, 2021, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in NCAA v. Alston, a case addressing a Ninth Circuit decision holding that the National Collegiate Athletic Association's eligibility rules regarding compensation of student-athletes violate...
Joshua Wright, a former commissioner at the Federal Trade Commission, joined us to discuss oral arguments and the potential implications of the case.

Featuring:
- Joshua D. Wright, Executive Director, Global Antitrust Institute, 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.]]>3471administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-170-engine-of-inequali
Featuring:
- Wayne A. Abernathy, Former Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions, U.S. Department of the Treasury
- Karen Shaw Petrou, Managing Partner, Federal Financial Analytics, Inc.

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/44224726Tue, 06 Apr 2021 18:23:37 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn her landmark book, financial services doyenne Karen Petrou explains how, despite better intentions, Federal Reserve policies have been major drivers of economic inequality in America. Beginning with 2010 policies that widened the wealth gap, the...
Featuring:
- Wayne A. Abernathy, Former Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions, U.S. Department of the Treasury
- Karen Shaw Petrou, Managing Partner, Federal Financial Analytics, Inc.

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3613administrative law & regulatio,financial services,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-169-courthouse-steps-oPetitioners Cedar Point Nursery and Fowler Packing Company, Inc., are California agricultural employers subject to the Access Regulation. In 2015, union organizers came onto the property of Cedar Point Nursery, a strawberry plant harvester near the Oregon border. The same year, union organizers filed an unfair labor practices charge against Fowler Packing, a citrus and table grape grower, alleging that Fowler denied access to union organizers seeking to enter their property. Petitioners contend that the Access Regulation constitutes a per se taking by appropriating an easement for the benefit of third party union organizers. Petitioners add that, because there is no mechanism for providing just compensation to Petitioners, the Access Regulation violates the Takings Clause.
Respondents are members of the Agricultural Labor Relations Board. They argue that per se taking analysis is inappropriate because of time, place, and manner limitations contained in the Access Regulation. They urge the Court to analyze the Access Regulation under the multi-factor balancing test invoked in cases involving regulatory takings.
In 1979, a divided California Supreme Court rejected a takings claim brought by other California growers shortly after the Access Regulation went into effect. Petitioners in this case brought this case in federal court. A divided Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision rejecting Petitioners’ Fifth Amendment claim, and Petitioners’ petition for rehearing en banc was denied over the dissent of eight judges. The Supreme Court accepted the case in November 2020, and heard oral arguments on March 22, 2021.
Featuring:

Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/44118927Tue, 30 Mar 2021 17:29:38 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, the Supreme Court will decide whether a California “Access Regulation” violates the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The Access Regulation allows union organizers to enter the private property of...Petitioners Cedar Point Nursery and Fowler Packing Company, Inc., are California agricultural employers subject to the Access Regulation. In 2015, union organizers came onto the property of Cedar Point Nursery, a strawberry plant harvester near the Oregon border. The same year, union organizers filed an unfair labor practices charge against Fowler Packing, a citrus and table grape grower, alleging that Fowler denied access to union organizers seeking to enter their property. Petitioners contend that the Access Regulation constitutes a per se taking by appropriating an easement for the benefit of third party union organizers. Petitioners add that, because there is no mechanism for providing just compensation to Petitioners, the Access Regulation violates the Takings Clause.
Respondents are members of the Agricultural Labor Relations Board. They argue that per se taking analysis is inappropriate because of time, place, and manner limitations contained in the Access Regulation. They urge the Court to analyze the Access Regulation under the multi-factor balancing test invoked in cases involving regulatory takings.
In 1979, a divided California Supreme Court rejected a takings claim brought by other California growers shortly after the Access Regulation went into effect. Petitioners in this case brought this case in federal court. A divided Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision rejecting Petitioners’ Fifth Amendment claim, and Petitioners’ petition for rehearing en banc was denied over the dissent of eight judges. The Supreme Court accepted the case in November 2020, and heard oral arguments on March 22, 2021.
Featuring:

Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1695administrative law & regulatio,property law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-168-deepfakes-what-if-Lawmakers and academics have proposed laws to mitigate such harms. How should lawmakers approach the abusive use of Deepfakes? Can lawmakers craft legislation that limits the worst uses of Deepfakes without hampering the creation of valuable and creative Deepfake media? In this live podcast, leading experts discuss these and other questions related to this emerging technology, using Matthew Feeney's new paper on the topic, "Deepfake Laws Risk Creating More Problems Than They Solve," as a jumping-off point.
Featuring:

Joshua Abbott, Executive Director, Center for Law, Science and Innovation, Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law
Bobby Chesney, James A. Baker III Chair in the Rule of Law and World Affairs and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, University of Texas at Austin School of Law
Matthew Feeney, Director, Project on Emerging Technologies, Cato Institute
[Moderator] Kathryn Ciano Mauler, Product Counsel, Google

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/43948157Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:30:00 +0000The Federalist Society“Deepfakes” are one of the latest technologies to prompt debate about online media. Using Deepfake techniques, users can make realistic-looking fake media in which people say and/or or do things they never, in fact, said or did. Although...Lawmakers and academics have proposed laws to mitigate such harms. How should lawmakers approach the abusive use of Deepfakes? Can lawmakers craft legislation that limits the worst uses of Deepfakes without hampering the creation of valuable and creative Deepfake media? In this live podcast, leading experts discuss these and other questions related to this emerging technology, using Matthew Feeney's new paper on the topic, "Deepfake Laws Risk Creating More Problems Than They Solve," as a jumping-off point.
Featuring:

Joshua Abbott, Executive Director, Center for Law, Science and Innovation, Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law
Bobby Chesney, James A. Baker III Chair in the Rule of Law and World Affairs and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, University of Texas at Austin School of Law
Matthew Feeney, Director, Project on Emerging Technologies, Cato Institute
[Moderator] Kathryn Ciano Mauler, Product Counsel, Google

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3640administrative law & regulatio,first amendment,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-167-courthouse-steps-oGregory 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/43813516Tue, 09 Mar 2021 18:16:16 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe 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...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.]]>3530administrative law & regulatio,intellectual property,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-166-the-cfpb-taskforce
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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/43738326Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:50:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyRecent 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...
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.]]>4004administrative law & regulatio,corporations,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-165-fireside-chat-on-t
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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/43726264Wed, 03 Mar 2021 22:37:02 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe 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...
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.]]>4094administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-164-how-will-the-biden
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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/43639303Thu, 25 Feb 2021 18:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe 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...
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.]]>3823administrative law & regulatio,intellectual property,international law & trade,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-163-shapers-of-cyber-s
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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/43603190Tue, 23 Feb 2021 17:22:20 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn 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...
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.]]>3791administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-23-why-did-texas-lose-power
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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/43548874Fri, 19 Feb 2021 19:10:59 +0000The Federalist SocietyProfessor 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...
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.]]>2152administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,federalism,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-162-is-common-carrier-
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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/43509847Wed, 17 Feb 2021 14:45:20 +0000The Federalist SocietyRecently, 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'...
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.]]>3860administrative law & regulatio,corporations,securities & antitrust,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-22-senator-klobuchars-
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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/43408158Thu, 11 Feb 2021 21:42:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyAsheesh 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...
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.]]>1705administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-161-the-congressional-
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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/43286919Thu, 04 Feb 2021 17:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyAfter 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...
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.]]>3247administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-160-the-myths-and-fact
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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/43232555Mon, 01 Feb 2021 12:54:16 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe 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...
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.]]>3340administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-159-countering-the-pol
Some have hailed the rulemaking as an overdue counteroffensive against so-called "woke capitalism." Others worry that it would create a "Fairness Doctrine" for banks and question the potential unintended consequences of the rule for freedom of conscience and orderly bank supervision.

This live podcast explores the issues surrounding the politicization of financial services, including the OCC rulemaking and other recent initiatives. This is a subject on which reasonable minds across the political spectrum—from progressives and libertarians to conservatives—can and do disagree.

Featuring:
- John Berlau, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute
- Brian Knight, Director of Innovation and Governance and Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- [Moderator] C. Wallace DeWitt, Senior Counsel, Allen & Overy LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/43167077Thu, 28 Jan 2021 11:30:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn several recent high-profile cases, banks have conditioned or denied financial services to disfavored industries after campaigns against those industries by advocacy groups. In late-November 2020, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency...
Some have hailed the rulemaking as an overdue counteroffensive against so-called "woke capitalism." Others worry that it would create a "Fairness Doctrine" for banks and question the potential unintended consequences of the rule for freedom of conscience and orderly bank supervision.

This live podcast explores the issues surrounding the politicization of financial services, including the OCC rulemaking and other recent initiatives. This is a subject on which reasonable minds across the political spectrum—from progressives and libertarians to conservatives—can and do disagree.

Featuring:
- John Berlau, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute
- Brian Knight, Director of Innovation and Governance and Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- [Moderator] C. Wallace DeWitt, Senior Counsel, Allen & Overy LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3476administrative law & regulatio,civil rights,corporations,financial services,free speech & election law,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-158-courthouse-steps-o
To cover the oral arguments, Asheesh Agarwal, Deputy General Counsel at TechFreedom and an alumnus of the FTC, moderated a distinguished panel featuring Alden Abbott, the FTC's General Counsel, and Corbin Barthold, TechFreedom's Director of Appellate Litigation.

Featuring:
- Alden Abbott, General Counsel, Federal Trade Commission
- Corbin Barthold, Director of Appellate Litigation, TechFreedom
- [Moderator] Asheesh Agarwal, Deputy General Counsel, TechFreedom

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/43150724Wed, 27 Jan 2021 19:56:49 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn January 13, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in AMG Capital Management v. FTC, a case that could define the scope of the FTC's remedial authority and explore the limits of textualism. The FTC Act authorizes the Commission to seek a "permanent...
To cover the oral arguments, Asheesh Agarwal, Deputy General Counsel at TechFreedom and an alumnus of the FTC, moderated a distinguished panel featuring Alden Abbott, the FTC's General Counsel, and Corbin Barthold, TechFreedom's Director of Appellate Litigation.

Featuring:
- Alden Abbott, General Counsel, Federal Trade Commission
- Corbin Barthold, Director of Appellate Litigation, TechFreedom
- [Moderator] Asheesh Agarwal, Deputy General Counsel, TechFreedom

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3425administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-157-regulating-land-us
Featuring:
- Yonah Freemark, Senior Research Associate, Urban Institute
- Emily Hamilton, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- [Moderator] Luke Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/43131224Tue, 26 Jan 2021 14:20:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant changes in urban land use. Where possible, companies have shifted to partial or full remote work, leaving some office buildings to sit empty. Firms in the service industry have sought to move dining,...
Featuring:
- Yonah Freemark, Senior Research Associate, Urban Institute
- Emily Hamilton, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- [Moderator] Luke Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3604administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-156-incentivizing-drug
This live podcast explores the legal rules and institutions best-suited to promote the development and commercialization of new drugs and vaccines. One key question is whether to use a prize or patent system to incentivize drug development. Another is whether consumers pay twice for patented drugs developed using funding from the National Institutes of Health. Experts debate these questions and discuss the the legal, economic, and policy considerations at play for efforts to promote new medical innovation.

Featuring:
- David Hyman, Scott K. Ginsburg Professor of Health Law & Policy, Georgetown University
- Brian O'Shaughnessy, Partner, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP and Past President, Licensing Executives Society, USA & Canada
- [Moderator] Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law, 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/43047317Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyMedical innovation has made modern life miraculous by historical standards, as demonstrated by the unprecedented medical response to the COVID-19 pandemic. What made this possible? What's the best way to ensure future innovation in the treatment of...
This live podcast explores the legal rules and institutions best-suited to promote the development and commercialization of new drugs and vaccines. One key question is whether to use a prize or patent system to incentivize drug development. Another is whether consumers pay twice for patented drugs developed using funding from the National Institutes of Health. Experts debate these questions and discuss the the legal, economic, and policy considerations at play for efforts to promote new medical innovation.

Featuring:
- David Hyman, Scott K. Ginsburg Professor of Health Law & Policy, Georgetown University
- Brian O'Shaughnessy, Partner, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP and Past President, Licensing Executives Society, USA & Canada
- [Moderator] Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law, 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.]]>3151administrative law & regulatio,healthcare,intellectual property,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-155-international-refe
These policies enjoy bipartisan support, but they also face bipartisan opposition. Some think the Trump rules do not go far enough, and others argue that reference pricing is bad policy regardless.

In this episode, two distinguished experts who have worked and written extensively on this issue, Prof. Adam Mossoff and Dr. Wendell Primus, join us for a discussion of reference pricing, current policy proposals, and future challenges.

Featuring:
- Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
- Wendell Primus, Senior Policy Advisor on Budget and Health Issues, Office of Speaker Nancy Pelosi
- [Moderator] Dean Reuter, Vice President, General Counsel, and Director of Practice Groups, The Federalist Society

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42920837Wed, 13 Jan 2021 18:29:34 +0000The Federalist SocietyDrug prices are a pressing policy issue. On November 20, 2020, President Donald Trump announced two new rules aimed at reducing drug prices for Medicare beneficiaries. These rules use a system known as reference pricing, which ties the price the...
These policies enjoy bipartisan support, but they also face bipartisan opposition. Some think the Trump rules do not go far enough, and others argue that reference pricing is bad policy regardless.

In this episode, two distinguished experts who have worked and written extensively on this issue, Prof. Adam Mossoff and Dr. Wendell Primus, join us for a discussion of reference pricing, current policy proposals, and future challenges.

Featuring:
- Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
- Wendell Primus, Senior Policy Advisor on Budget and Health Issues, Office of Speaker Nancy Pelosi
- [Moderator] Dean Reuter, Vice President, General Counsel, and Director of Practice Groups, The Federalist Society

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3562administrative law & regulatio,intellectual property,international law & trade,law & economics,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-154-tech-policy-under-
Featuring:
- Jennifer Huddleston, Director of Technology & Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
- Blake Reid, Clinical Professor, University of Colorado Law School
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42815321Wed, 06 Jan 2021 12:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, an expert panel looks at what the new year may bring regarding the hot topics of tech policy. Some key policy debates – such as antitrust and "Big Tech," online speech and Section 230, and the race to 5G – are likely to continue, but...
Featuring:
- Jennifer Huddleston, Director of Technology & Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
- Blake Reid, Clinical Professor, University of Colorado Law School
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3460administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrust,security & privacy,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-153-reboot-conversatio
Despite the rapid maturation of the technology, mass-market services are still years away in the United States in part because of difficult legal and policy questions raised in a recent GAO report to Congress: Should state or federal aviation officials regulate low-altitude drone services and operations? How do regulators encourage a healthy drone services industry while protecting residents' property rights and privacy? Who will build and operate unmanned traffic management systems? This expert panel discussed these topics and more in a Lincoln Network Reboot Conversation co-sponsored by the Regulatory Transparency Project.

Featuring:
- Reggie Govan, Former Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration
- Alexiaa Jordan, Innovation, Cyber, and National Security Analyst; Lincoln Network
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42707693Tue, 29 Dec 2020 17:07:35 +0000The Federalist SocietyThere are nearly 500,000 commercial drones registered in the United States, far exceeding recent FAA projections. Fields like photography, agriculture, and public safety have adopted drone services and there are a few programs for long-distance...
Despite the rapid maturation of the technology, mass-market services are still years away in the United States in part because of difficult legal and policy questions raised in a recent GAO report to Congress: Should state or federal aviation officials regulate low-altitude drone services and operations? How do regulators encourage a healthy drone services industry while protecting residents' property rights and privacy? Who will build and operate unmanned traffic management systems? This expert panel discussed these topics and more in a Lincoln Network Reboot Conversation co-sponsored by the Regulatory Transparency Project.

Featuring:
- Reggie Govan, Former Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration
- Alexiaa Jordan, Innovation, Cyber, and National Security Analyst; Lincoln Network
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3473administrative law & regulatio,federalism,property law,regulatory transparency projec,security & privacy,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-21-how-is-insurance-re
Ian Adams joins the podcast to answer these questions and more.

Featuring:
- Ian Adams, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42633797Wed, 23 Dec 2020 17:17:42 +0000The Federalist SocietyHow is insurance regulated in the United States? How are emerging technologies disrupting the industry? And what issues do policymakers face regarding privacy concerns in our era of big data? Ian Adams joins the podcast to answer these questions...
Ian Adams joins the podcast to answer these questions and more.

Featuring:
- Ian Adams, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>991administrative law & regulatio,federalism,regulatory transparency projec,security & privacy,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-152-covid-19-regulator
Featuring:
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center
- Sally Katzen, Professor of Practice and Distinguished Scholar in Residence & Co-Director of the Legislative and Regulatory Process Clinic, New York University
- [Moderator] Daniel Flores, Senior Counsel, Committee on Oversight and Reform, U.S. House of Representatives

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42600775Mon, 21 Dec 2020 15:30:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyFollowing the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Trump administration waived or suspended enforcement of a number of regulations, such as regulations affecting telemedicine. Will the Biden administration continue existing waivers or suspensions as is...
Featuring:
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center
- Sally Katzen, Professor of Practice and Distinguished Scholar in Residence & Co-Director of the Legislative and Regulatory Process Clinic, New York University
- [Moderator] Daniel Flores, Senior Counsel, Committee on Oversight and Reform, U.S. House of Representatives

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3593administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-151-public-input-in-ag
Though the increased public awareness of the power of regulatory agencies is undoubtedly a good thing, what exactly is an agency supposed to do with 22 million public comments? Even discounting for fraudulent or computer-generated comments (of which the agency received millions), does the agency have any obligation to consider whether or not members of the public approve of its proposed action? Should it? And if it should, is counting comments an effective way of determining public sentiment? The law provides very few clear answers to these questions, and there’s a major disconnect between the views of the public (who tend to see the public comment process as a vote) and regulators (who view comments as valuable only if they provide technical information). This panel considers both the legal and policy issues surrounding the question of whether, and how, an agency should take account of public opinion as expressed in comments.

Featuring:
- Steven Balla, Associate Professor of Political Science, Public Policy and Public Administration, and International Affairs, George Washington University
- Reeve Bull, Research Director, Administrative Conference of the United States
- Michael Livermore, Edward F. Howrey Professor of Law, University of Virginia
- [Moderator] Susan Dudley, Director, GW Regulatory Studies Center & Distinguished Professor of Practice, Trachtenberg School of Public Policy & Public Administration, The George Washington University

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

Any views expressed by the speakers are those of the speakers in their personal capacities. They do not necessarily reflect the positions of their affiliated organizations. In Mr. Bull’s case, he is speaking exclusively in his personal capacity and not as an employee of the Administrative Conference.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42541393Thu, 17 Dec 2020 14:30:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyWhen the FCC put forward its proposed repeal of the net neutrality rule, it received 22 million public comments, by far the largest number any agency has ever received in connection with a rulemaking. The overwhelming public reaction was probably a...
Though the increased public awareness of the power of regulatory agencies is undoubtedly a good thing, what exactly is an agency supposed to do with 22 million public comments? Even discounting for fraudulent or computer-generated comments (of which the agency received millions), does the agency have any obligation to consider whether or not members of the public approve of its proposed action? Should it? And if it should, is counting comments an effective way of determining public sentiment? The law provides very few clear answers to these questions, and there’s a major disconnect between the views of the public (who tend to see the public comment process as a vote) and regulators (who view comments as valuable only if they provide technical information). This panel considers both the legal and policy issues surrounding the question of whether, and how, an agency should take account of public opinion as expressed in comments.

Featuring:
- Steven Balla, Associate Professor of Political Science, Public Policy and Public Administration, and International Affairs, George Washington University
- Reeve Bull, Research Director, Administrative Conference of the United States
- Michael Livermore, Edward F. Howrey Professor of Law, University of Virginia
- [Moderator] Susan Dudley, Director, GW Regulatory Studies Center & Distinguished Professor of Practice, Trachtenberg School of Public Policy & Public Administration, The George Washington University

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

Any views expressed by the speakers are those of the speakers in their personal capacities. They do not necessarily reflect the positions of their affiliated organizations. In Mr. Bull’s case, he is speaking exclusively in his personal capacity and not as an employee of the Administrative Conference.]]>4072administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-episode-12-airspace-and-dro
The paper is available here: https://www.mercatus.org/publications/technology-and-innovation/drone-technology-airspace-design-and-aerial-law-states-and-0.

Featuring:
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42521421Wed, 16 Dec 2020 11:45:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Brent Skorup discusses the current state of drone technology, the history of airspace and drone regulations in the United States, and his new paper, "Drone Technology, Airspace Design, and Aerial Law in States and Cities," published...
The paper is available here: https://www.mercatus.org/publications/technology-and-innovation/drone-technology-airspace-design-and-aerial-law-states-and-0.

Featuring:
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1190administrative law & regulatio,federalism,property law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-150-regulating-busines
In this live podcast, Brian Kabateck, Luke Wake, and Clark Neily address vital questions raised by the virus, including how states should balance public health and economic concerns, whether states should change their enforcement priorities during the crisis, and whether this is the right time for states to liberalize economic regulations more generally. The discussion is centered around several proposals from the Regulatory Transparency Project's State & Local Working Group, which recently published a white paper entitled "Ten Reforms to Spur Coronavirus Recovery."

Featuring:
- Brian Kabateck, Founding and Managing Partner, Kabateck LLP
- Luke Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- [Moderator] Clark Neily, Vice President for Criminal Justice, Cato Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42419124Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:30:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyCOVID-19 has presented unique challenges for state lawmakers as they attempt to address public health and economic concerns. The crisis has also raised significant questions about whether states should reform existing regulatory regimes, and about the...
In this live podcast, Brian Kabateck, Luke Wake, and Clark Neily address vital questions raised by the virus, including how states should balance public health and economic concerns, whether states should change their enforcement priorities during the crisis, and whether this is the right time for states to liberalize economic regulations more generally. The discussion is centered around several proposals from the Regulatory Transparency Project's State & Local Working Group, which recently published a white paper entitled "Ten Reforms to Spur Coronavirus Recovery."

Featuring:
- Brian Kabateck, Founding and Managing Partner, Kabateck LLP
- Luke Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- [Moderator] Clark Neily, Vice President for Criminal Justice, Cato Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3497administrative law & regulatio,federalism,law & economics,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-20-covid-19-vaccine-ap
Featuring:
- Joel Zinberg, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42404392Wed, 09 Dec 2020 20:44:15 +0000The Federalist SocietyJoel Zinberg joins the podcast to discuss a range of COVID-19 vaccine questions. How has the development process under Operation Warp Speed compared to the normal vaccine development process? Where do the leading vaccines currently stand in terms of...
Featuring:
- Joel Zinberg, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1332administrative law & regulatio,federalism,healthcare,intellectual property,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-149-a-conversation-wit
Featuring:
- Ajit Pai, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission
- [Moderator] Brad Larson, Regulatory Transparency Project Series Chair, the Federalist Society's Columbia Student Chapter

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42383225Tue, 08 Dec 2020 13:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn November 30, 2020, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai joined the Federalist Society's Columbia Student Chapter for a wide-ranging discussion on net neutrality, Section 230, and more, in an online Q&A co-sponsored by the Regulatory Transparency Project....
Featuring:
- Ajit Pai, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission
- [Moderator] Brad Larson, Regulatory Transparency Project Series Chair, the Federalist Society's Columbia Student Chapter

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2111administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-148-civil-liberties-an
Featuring:
- Julia Mahoney, John S. Battle Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
- [Introduction] J. Gregory Grisham, Of Counsel, Fisher & Phillips, LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42367185Mon, 07 Dec 2020 16:30:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn November 19, 2020, the Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project and the Memphis Lawyers Chapter co-hosted an online event on "Civil Liberties and COVID-19 Shelter in Place Orders." Featuring: - Julia Mahoney, John S. Battle...
Featuring:
- Julia Mahoney, John S. Battle Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
- [Introduction] J. Gregory Grisham, Of Counsel, Fisher & Phillips, LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3836administrative law & regulatio,civil rights,constitution,federalism & separation of pow,regulatory transparency projec,state courts,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-19-the-burden-of-proof
One of the recommendations in the report involves shifting the evidentiary burden of proof from the plaintiff to the defendant, particularly in civil mergers challenges, which would entail a significant change to antitrust law.

In this episode, Ashley Baker lays out the current burden of proof framework used in U.S. courts in competition law cases, the role of presumptions in antitrust litigation, and the potential implications of the burden shift proposed in the report.

Featuring:
- 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42286181Wed, 02 Dec 2020 22:06:26 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe House Committee on the Judiciary recently released a report on the state of competition in the digital marketplace. The report, which was the result of a 16-month-long investigation, describes itself as "an attack on how America has approached...
One of the recommendations in the report involves shifting the evidentiary burden of proof from the plaintiff to the defendant, particularly in civil mergers challenges, which would entail a significant change to antitrust law.

In this episode, Ashley Baker lays out the current burden of proof framework used in U.S. courts in competition law cases, the role of presumptions in antitrust litigation, and the potential implications of the burden shift proposed in the report.

Featuring:
- 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.]]>993administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-147-the-state-of-stateFeaturing:

Jennifer Huddleston, Director of Technology & Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
Joseph Jerome, Multistate Policy Director, Common Sense Media
[Moderator] Matthew Heiman, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary, Waystar Health; Senior Fellow and Director of Planning, National Security Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42258613Mon, 30 Nov 2020 19:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn the absence of federal data privacy legislation, some states have acted to pass their own laws on the topic. Notably, California voted in favor of Prop 24 placing additional requirements on the CCPA and in favor of stringent consumer privacy...Featuring:

Jennifer Huddleston, Director of Technology & Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
Joseph Jerome, Multistate Policy Director, Common Sense Media
[Moderator] Matthew Heiman, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary, Waystar Health; Senior Fellow and Director of Planning, National Security Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3429administrative law & regulatio,state governments,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-146-fireside-chat-with
This live podcast featuring FTC Commissioner Noah Phillips, Svetlana Gans, and Koren Wong-Ervin features an insightful look at the report, its findings, and its potential ramifications.

Featuring:
- Svetlana Gans, Vice President & Associate General Counsel, NCTA
- Hon. Noah Phillips, Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission
- Koren Wong-Ervin, Partner, Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42122082Mon, 23 Nov 2020 11:20:37 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe House Judiciary Committee’s Antitrust Subcommittee recently released findings of a 16-month investigation into competition in the digital economy. The 449-page staff report, “Investigation of Competition in the Digital Marketplace: Majority Staff...
This live podcast featuring FTC Commissioner Noah Phillips, Svetlana Gans, and Koren Wong-Ervin features an insightful look at the report, its findings, and its potential ramifications.

Featuring:
- Svetlana Gans, Vice President & Associate General Counsel, NCTA
- Hon. Noah Phillips, Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission
- Koren Wong-Ervin, Partner, Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3564administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-18-driverless-cars-bal
Featuring:
- Ian Adams, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42063858Thu, 19 Nov 2020 21:50:09 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Ian Adams lays out the current state of driverless car technology, discusses its implications for the disabled community, and breaks down the decisions federal and state policymakers are facing when it comes to regulating the...
Featuring:
- Ian Adams, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1075administrative law & regulatio,federalism,intellectual property,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-145-the-true-extent-of
In his new book, "Defender in Chief," Yoo argues that President Trump – despite his populism – has become more often the defender rather than the opponent of the original Constitution. In "The Living Presidency," Prakash counters that Trump, like many modern presidents, has violated the Constitution's grant of executive power.

Featuring:
- Saikrishna B. Prakash, James Monroe Distinguished Professor of Law and Paul G. Mahoney Research Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
- John C. Yoo, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law; Co-Faculty Director, Korea Law Center; and Director, Public Law & Policy Program, UC Berkeley School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/42008541Mon, 16 Nov 2020 16:45:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn October 20, 2020, the Federalist Society's Georgetown Law Student Chapter and the Regulatory Transparency Project hosted John C. Yoo and Saikrishna B. Prakash for an online discussion on the extent of executive power. In his new book, "Defender...
In his new book, "Defender in Chief," Yoo argues that President Trump – despite his populism – has become more often the defender rather than the opponent of the original Constitution. In "The Living Presidency," Prakash counters that Trump, like many modern presidents, has violated the Constitution's grant of executive power.

Featuring:
- Saikrishna B. Prakash, James Monroe Distinguished Professor of Law and Paul G. Mahoney Research Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
- John C. Yoo, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law; Co-Faculty Director, Korea Law Center; and Director, Public Law & Policy Program, UC Berkeley School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3549administrative law & regulatio,constitution,founding era & history,regulatory transparency projec,separation of powerscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-144-united-states-v-go
Featuring:
- Geoffrey A. Manne, President and Founder, International Center for Law & Economics
- A. Douglas Melamed, Professor of the Practice of Law, Stanford Law School
- Christopher L. Sagers, James A. Thomas Distinguished Professor of Law, Cleveland-Marshall College of Law
- [Moderator] Brianna S. Hills, Associate, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/41929168Fri, 06 Nov 2020 18:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn October 20, 2020, the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed its much-anticipated lawsuit against Google. The case is the most high-profile antitrust challenge since the Microsoft case more than 20 years ago. The Justice Department has alleged that...
Featuring:
- Geoffrey A. Manne, President and Founder, International Center for Law & Economics
- A. Douglas Melamed, Professor of the Practice of Law, Stanford Law School
- Christopher L. Sagers, James A. Thomas Distinguished Professor of Law, Cleveland-Marshall College of Law
- [Moderator] Brianna S. Hills, Associate, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3643administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-134-pandemic-patents-dFeaturing:

George Horvath, Assistant Professor of Law, University of Akron School of Law
Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
[Moderator] Camilla Hrdy, Associate Professor of Law, University of Akron School of Law



Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/41816840Thu, 05 Nov 2020 17:40:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn October 28, 2020 the Federalist Society's Akron Student Chapter hosted George Horvath and Adam Mossoff for a discussion of how patents can affect medical innovation. Specifically, the two discussed how patents have already come into play in the...Featuring:

George Horvath, Assistant Professor of Law, University of Akron School of Law
Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
[Moderator] Camilla Hrdy, Associate Professor of Law, University of Akron School of Law



Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3719administrative law & regulatio,healthcare,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-142-the-united-states-
On this live podcast, world-renowned experts in intellectual property and China's policies discuss whether this constitutes a violation of international norms, and what, if anything, the United States should be doing about it.

Featuring:
- Mark Cohen, Director and Senior Fellow, Berkeley Center for Law and Technology, University of California at Berkeley
- Hon. Paul R. Michel, Chief Judge (ret.), U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- Hon. Randall R. Rader, Chief Judge (ret.), U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and Honorary Professor, Tsinghua 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/41686232Wed, 28 Oct 2020 15:30:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyRecent disputes between the United States and China have focused on trade, but perhaps the most potent trade-related issue is not tangible products but intangible property. China's policies and practices involving intellectual property reveal a plan...
On this live podcast, world-renowned experts in intellectual property and China's policies discuss whether this constitutes a violation of international norms, and what, if anything, the United States should be doing about it.

Featuring:
- Mark Cohen, Director and Senior Fellow, Berkeley Center for Law and Technology, University of California at Berkeley
- Hon. Paul R. Michel, Chief Judge (ret.), U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- Hon. Randall R. Rader, Chief Judge (ret.), U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and Honorary Professor, Tsinghua 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.]]>4041administrative law & regulatio,intellectual property,international law & trade,international & national secur,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-141-interoperability-a
Although both forms of portability aim to enhance consumer welfare and increase competition, data portability raises a host of issues, such as privacy protection, data security, and intellectual property rights. Additionally, there is evidence that data portability mandates, when used as a competition remedy, is costly, ineffective, and may reduce business incentives, and could entrench incumbents by making it difficult for smaller competitors to change their services and modernize their products.

This comes as many competition agencies and legislatures alike are considering interoperability and data portability mandates to increase competition. And, Congress is set to release a report with recommendations for reducing the market power of online platforms, which may include these mandates.

The Regulatory Transparency Project explored the hot topic of data portability over the course of a two-part virtual panel series entitled, "Data Portability Mandates, Consumer Privacy Protections, and Competition Law." The first panel discussed the consumer protection and privacy implications of data portability, and this panel turned to the use of portability and interoperability mandates in competition law.

Featuring:
- Jay Ezrielev, Founder and Managing Principal, Elevecon LLC
- Bruce Hoffman, Partner, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
- Alex Petros, Policy Counsel, Public Knowledge
- [Moderator] 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/41648398Mon, 26 Oct 2020 13:45:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyData portability has been a hot topic of late, from GDPR to CCPA to the FTC's recent Data to Go Workshop. To some, data portability is a consumer right to access and move individual data. For others, data portability means the sharing of larger swaths...
Although both forms of portability aim to enhance consumer welfare and increase competition, data portability raises a host of issues, such as privacy protection, data security, and intellectual property rights. Additionally, there is evidence that data portability mandates, when used as a competition remedy, is costly, ineffective, and may reduce business incentives, and could entrench incumbents by making it difficult for smaller competitors to change their services and modernize their products.

This comes as many competition agencies and legislatures alike are considering interoperability and data portability mandates to increase competition. And, Congress is set to release a report with recommendations for reducing the market power of online platforms, which may include these mandates.

The Regulatory Transparency Project explored the hot topic of data portability over the course of a two-part virtual panel series entitled, "Data Portability Mandates, Consumer Privacy Protections, and Competition Law." The first panel discussed the consumer protection and privacy implications of data portability, and this panel turned to the use of portability and interoperability mandates in competition law.

Featuring:
- Jay Ezrielev, Founder and Managing Principal, Elevecon LLC
- Bruce Hoffman, Partner, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
- Alex Petros, Policy Counsel, Public Knowledge
- [Moderator] 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.]]>4369administrative law & regulatio,corporations,securities & antitrust,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-140-it-can-be-done-liv
Over the next 30 years, our global population is expected to grow by more than 2 billion people to 9 billion people inhabiting this planet. How will we feed a rapidly growing population with decreased land and water resources and increased attention to animal welfare and the environment? Is that even possible? The panelists explored the potential of human ingenuity to solve these problems and the conditions necessary to make those solutions a reality. We say it can be done.

Featuring:
- John Mackey, Co-Founder and CEO, Whole Foods Market
- Sonny Perdue, Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture
- Josh Tetrick, Co-Founder and CEO, Eat Just, Inc.
- [Moderator] Anastasia P. Boden, Attorney, Economic Liberty Project, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website — www.RegProject.org — to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/41572413Wed, 21 Oct 2020 17:25:15 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe creators of the award-winning documentary, They Say It Can't Be Done, in partnership with the Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project, present It Can Be Done Live — a conversation between entrepreneurs, regulatory experts, and noted...
Over the next 30 years, our global population is expected to grow by more than 2 billion people to 9 billion people inhabiting this planet. How will we feed a rapidly growing population with decreased land and water resources and increased attention to animal welfare and the environment? Is that even possible? The panelists explored the potential of human ingenuity to solve these problems and the conditions necessary to make those solutions a reality. We say it can be done.

Featuring:
- John Mackey, Co-Founder and CEO, Whole Foods Market
- Sonny Perdue, Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture
- Josh Tetrick, Co-Founder and CEO, Eat Just, Inc.
- [Moderator] Anastasia P. Boden, Attorney, Economic Liberty Project, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website — www.RegProject.org — to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>4305administrative law & regulatio,culture,environmental & energy law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-139-implications-of-da
Although both forms of portability aim to enhance consumer welfare and increase competition, data portability raises a host of issues, such as privacy protection, data security, and intellectual property rights. Additionally, there is evidence that data portability mandates, when used as a competition remedy, is costly, ineffective, and may reduce business incentives, and could entrench incumbents by making it difficult for smaller competitors to change their services and modernize their products.

This comes as many competition agencies and legislatures alike are considering interoperability and data portability mandates to increase competition. And, Congress is set to release a report with recommendations for reducing the market power of online platforms, which may include these mandates.

The Regulatory Transparency Project explored the hot topic of data portability over the course of a two-part virtual panel series entitled, "Data Portability Mandates, Consumer Privacy Protections, and Competition Law." This panel discussed the consumer protection and privacy implications of data portability, and the second panel turned to the use of portability and interoperability mandates in competition law.

Featuring:
- Peter Swire, Elizabeth and Thomas Holder Chair and Professor of Law and Ethics, Scheller College of Business, Georgia Institute of Technology
- Liad Wagman, Professor of Economics, Stuart School of Business, Illinois Institute of Technology
- Gabriela Zanfir-Fortuna, Senior Counsel, Future of Privacy Forum
- [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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/41539345Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:30:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyData portability has been a hot topic of late, from GDPR to CCPA to the FTC’s recent Data to Go Workshop. To some, data portability is a consumer right to access and move individual data. For others, data portability means the sharing of larger...
Although both forms of portability aim to enhance consumer welfare and increase competition, data portability raises a host of issues, such as privacy protection, data security, and intellectual property rights. Additionally, there is evidence that data portability mandates, when used as a competition remedy, is costly, ineffective, and may reduce business incentives, and could entrench incumbents by making it difficult for smaller competitors to change their services and modernize their products.

This comes as many competition agencies and legislatures alike are considering interoperability and data portability mandates to increase competition. And, Congress is set to release a report with recommendations for reducing the market power of online platforms, which may include these mandates.

The Regulatory Transparency Project explored the hot topic of data portability over the course of a two-part virtual panel series entitled, "Data Portability Mandates, Consumer Privacy Protections, and Competition Law." This panel discussed the consumer protection and privacy implications of data portability, and the second panel turned to the use of portability and interoperability mandates in competition law.

Featuring:
- Peter Swire, Elizabeth and Thomas Holder Chair and Professor of Law and Ethics, Scheller College of Business, Georgia Institute of Technology
- Liad Wagman, Professor of Economics, Stuart School of Business, Illinois Institute of Technology
- Gabriela Zanfir-Fortuna, Senior Counsel, Future of Privacy Forum
- [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.]]>3575administrative law & regulatio,corporations,securities & antitrust,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-17-a-big-week-for-sect
Featuring:
- Jennifer Huddleston, Director of Technology and Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
- Ashkhen Kazaryan, Director of Civil Liberties, TechFreedom

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/41499602Fri, 16 Oct 2020 16:22:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Jennifer Huddleston and Ashkhen Kazaryan break down the recent news related to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, including Justice Clarence Thomas's statement, controversy over Twitter and Facebook's moderation practices,...
Featuring:
- Jennifer Huddleston, Director of Technology and Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
- Ashkhen Kazaryan, Director of Civil Liberties, TechFreedom

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1571cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-138-it-can-be-done-liv
By 2050, 9 billion humans will share this planet and how we protect it is one of the most important questions of our time. How will we ensure that we can adapt to a changing climate, that we will all have access to clean air and fresh water, and that habitats are protected? While these goals have notable public support, reasonable people differ on the best methods to protect the environment. Are there more effective and less burdensome ways to accomplish these vital goals? The panelists explored the potential of human ingenuity to solve these problems and the conditions necessary to make those solutions a reality. We say it can be done.

Featuring:
- James W. Coleman, Associate Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law
- David Doniger, Director, Climate & Clean Air Program, Natural Resources Defense Council
- Charles Hernick, Vice President of Policy and Advocacy, Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions
- Andrew Wheeler, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
- [Moderator] Susan Dudley, Director, Regulatory Studies Center and 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/41481526Thu, 15 Oct 2020 20:32:08 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe creators of the award-winning documentary, They Say It Can't Be Done, in partnership with the Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project, present It Can Be Done Live - a conversation between entrepreneurs, regulatory experts, and noted...
By 2050, 9 billion humans will share this planet and how we protect it is one of the most important questions of our time. How will we ensure that we can adapt to a changing climate, that we will all have access to clean air and fresh water, and that habitats are protected? While these goals have notable public support, reasonable people differ on the best methods to protect the environment. Are there more effective and less burdensome ways to accomplish these vital goals? The panelists explored the potential of human ingenuity to solve these problems and the conditions necessary to make those solutions a reality. We say it can be done.

Featuring:
- James W. Coleman, Associate Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law
- David Doniger, Director, Climate & Clean Air Program, Natural Resources Defense Council
- Charles Hernick, Vice President of Policy and Advocacy, Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions
- Andrew Wheeler, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
- [Moderator] Susan Dudley, Director, Regulatory Studies Center and 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.]]>5316administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,environmental law & property r,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-137-antitrust-populism
During the 1986 Supreme Court confirmation hearings for then-Judge Antonin Scalia, he was asked about his views on antitrust. "In law school, I never understood [antitrust law]," Scalia explained, "I later found out, in reading the writings of those who now do understand it, that I should not have understood it because it did not make any sense then." Some contend that the much-needed coherency in antitrust law was brought about by the Chicago School revolution and the adoption of the consumer welfare standard.

Today, Robert Bork's consumer welfare paradigm faces challenges. Antitrust law is back at a political crossroads, with both sides calling for a politicized approach to address problems such as anti-conservative bias, economic and racial inequality, and a whole host of other issues, while focusing on slogans and labels rather than relevant economic and legal questions. Additionally, some experts argue that the economic consequences of many of the recent proposals would make the American economy and consumers substantially worse off across a wide array of industries. At the same time, today's antitrust debate underscores some interesting rifts and tension within both political parties, serving as an interesting microcosm of broader political dynamics.

Featuring:
-Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice
-Herbert Hovenkamp, James G. Dinan University Professor, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/41459348Wed, 14 Oct 2020 12:45:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn October 7, 2020, the Federalist Society's Pennsylvania Student Chapter and the Regulatory Transparency Project co-sponsored an event on "Antitrust Populism and the Conservative Movement." During the 1986 Supreme Court confirmation hearings for...
During the 1986 Supreme Court confirmation hearings for then-Judge Antonin Scalia, he was asked about his views on antitrust. "In law school, I never understood [antitrust law]," Scalia explained, "I later found out, in reading the writings of those who now do understand it, that I should not have understood it because it did not make any sense then." Some contend that the much-needed coherency in antitrust law was brought about by the Chicago School revolution and the adoption of the consumer welfare standard.

Today, Robert Bork's consumer welfare paradigm faces challenges. Antitrust law is back at a political crossroads, with both sides calling for a politicized approach to address problems such as anti-conservative bias, economic and racial inequality, and a whole host of other issues, while focusing on slogans and labels rather than relevant economic and legal questions. Additionally, some experts argue that the economic consequences of many of the recent proposals would make the American economy and consumers substantially worse off across a wide array of industries. At the same time, today's antitrust debate underscores some interesting rifts and tension within both political parties, serving as an interesting microcosm of broader political dynamics.

Featuring:
-Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice
-Herbert Hovenkamp, James G. Dinan University Professor, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3792administrative law & regulatio,corporations,politics,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-16-an-update-on-antitr
Featuring:
- Neil Chilson, Senior Research Fellow for Technology and Innovation, Charles Koch Institute

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/41446280Tue, 13 Oct 2020 18:30:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyRecent weeks have been chock-full of headlines regarding antitrust and big tech companies, from the House Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee report to the Senate Commerce Committee subpoenas of top CEOs. In this episode, Neil Chilson breaks down these...
Featuring:
- Neil Chilson, Senior Research Fellow for Technology and Innovation, Charles Koch Institute

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1012administrative law & regulatio,corporations,securities & antitrust,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-136-it-can-be-done-live-the-fu
We are in the throes of a global pandemic that threatens the lives of millions and the way of life for billions more. Our healthcare systems are stretched to their limits. At the same time, innovations are being developed that could move us from treatments to outright cures. How do we ensure that these advancements are safe and effective, but not needlessly delayed when we need them most? The panelists explored the potential of human ingenuity to solve these problems and the conditions necessary to make those solutions a reality. We say it can be done.

Featuring:
- Julie Allickson, Chief Manufacturing Development Center Officer, Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine
- Betsy McCaughey, Chairman, Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths
- Joshua Sharfstein, Vice Dean for Public Health Practice and Community Engagement, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University
- Dan Troy, Chief Business Officer, Chief Administrative Officer, and General Counsel, Valo
- [Moderator] Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/41370916Thu, 08 Oct 2020 17:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe creators of the award-winning documentary, They Say It Can't Be Done, in partnership with the Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project, present It Can Be Done Live - a conversation between entrepreneurs, regulatory experts, and noted...
We are in the throes of a global pandemic that threatens the lives of millions and the way of life for billions more. Our healthcare systems are stretched to their limits. At the same time, innovations are being developed that could move us from treatments to outright cures. How do we ensure that these advancements are safe and effective, but not needlessly delayed when we need them most? The panelists explored the potential of human ingenuity to solve these problems and the conditions necessary to make those solutions a reality. We say it can be done.

Featuring:
- Julie Allickson, Chief Manufacturing Development Center Officer, Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine
- Betsy McCaughey, Chairman, Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths
- Joshua Sharfstein, Vice Dean for Public Health Practice and Community Engagement, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University
- Dan Troy, Chief Business Officer, Chief Administrative Officer, and General Counsel, Valo
- [Moderator] Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>4697administrative law & regulatio,healthcare,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-135-evaluating-the-epa-s-propo
Featuring:
- Jeffrey R. Holmstead, Partner, Bracewell LLP
- Justin Schwab, Founder, CGCN Law, PLLC
- [Moderator] Daren Bakst, Senior Research Fellow, The Heritage Foundation

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/41351927Wed, 07 Oct 2020 20:43:15 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Environmental Protection Agency recently proposed retaining both the existing particulate matter and ozone primary and secondary standards. Over the last several decades, air quality in the United States has improved dramatically. Though many have...
Featuring:
- Jeffrey R. Holmstead, Partner, Bracewell LLP
- Justin Schwab, Founder, CGCN Law, PLLC
- [Moderator] Daren Bakst, Senior Research Fellow, The Heritage Foundation

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3574administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-134-it-can-be-done-liv
Our oceans are changing rapidly and not for the better. Ocean acidification, rising sea levels, plastic waste, and overfishing are contributing to an unsustainable and unhealthy ecosystem in our seas. Can we find a way to reverse the damage? The panelists will explore the potential of human ingenuity to solve these problems and the conditions necessary to make those solutions a reality. We say it can be done.

Featuring:
- Tom Bell, Professor, Dale E. Fowler School of Law, Chapman University
- Patrick Reasonover, Producer, They Say It Can't Be Done
- Scotty Schmidt, Co-Founder & CEO, Primary Ocean Providers
- Julie Friedman Steele, CEO & Board Chair, World Future Society
- [Moderator] Kimberly Hermann, General Counsel, Southeastern Legal Foundation

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/41230203Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:30:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe creators of the award-winning documentary, They Say It Can't Be Done, in partnership with the Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project, present It Can Be Done Live - a conversation between entrepreneurs, regulatory experts, and noted...
Our oceans are changing rapidly and not for the better. Ocean acidification, rising sea levels, plastic waste, and overfishing are contributing to an unsustainable and unhealthy ecosystem in our seas. Can we find a way to reverse the damage? The panelists will explore the potential of human ingenuity to solve these problems and the conditions necessary to make those solutions a reality. We say it can be done.

Featuring:
- Tom Bell, Professor, Dale E. Fowler School of Law, Chapman University
- Patrick Reasonover, Producer, They Say It Can't Be Done
- Scotty Schmidt, Co-Founder & CEO, Primary Ocean Providers
- Julie Friedman Steele, CEO & Board Chair, World Future Society
- [Moderator] Kimberly Hermann, General Counsel, Southeastern Legal Foundation

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>5525administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,international law & trade,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-133-medicare-for-all-a
Featuring:
- Michael F. Cannon, Director, Health Policy Studies, Cato Institute
- Delphine O'Rourke, Partner, Goodwin Procter LLP
- Ed Weisbart, Chair, Missouri Chapter, Physicians for a National Health Program

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/41211350Tue, 29 Sep 2020 18:50:59 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn September 22, the Federalist Society's Villanova Student Chapter co-sponsored a debate on Medicare for All with the Villanova Law Health Law Society. In this live podcast, experts debate the pros and cons of a single-payer health insurance system,...
Featuring:
- Michael F. Cannon, Director, Health Policy Studies, Cato Institute
- Delphine O'Rourke, Partner, Goodwin Procter LLP
- Ed Weisbart, Chair, Missouri Chapter, Physicians for a National Health Program

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3928administrative law & regulatio,healthcarecleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-132-a-conversation-wit
The comment period for the proposed rule closed in late June. This live podcast features an update and an informative conversation with Administrator Wheeler and Jeffrey Holmstead.

Featuring:
- Andrew Wheeler, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency
- [Moderator] Jeffrey Holmstead, Partner, Bracewell LLP

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/41048250Mon, 21 Sep 2020 20:48:45 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn May, the Environmental Protection Agency announced a new proposed rule to "establish the procedures and requirements for how the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will manage the issuance of guidance documents subject to the requirements...
The comment period for the proposed rule closed in late June. This live podcast features an update and an informative conversation with Administrator Wheeler and Jeffrey Holmstead.

Featuring:
- Andrew Wheeler, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency
- [Moderator] Jeffrey Holmstead, Partner, Bracewell LLP

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3480administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-episode-11-tiktoks-running-
How might this standoff play out? Does TikTok pose a significant enough national security threat to warrant the forced sale? And how does this situation fit into the broader picture of U.S.-China relations?

Experts discuss.

Featuring:

- Matthew Feeney, Director, Project on Emerging Technologies, The Cato Institute
- Jamil Jaffer, Founder & Executive Director, National Security Institute
- [Moderator] Ashkhen Kazaryan, Director of Civil Liberties, TechFreedom

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/40823703Thu, 10 Sep 2020 18:02:27 +0000The Federalist SocietyCiting national security concerns, the Trump administration has ordered TikTok's Chinese parent company, Bytedance Ltd., to sell U.S. operations of the popular video-sharing app to an American company by November 12. As the deadline inches closer,...
How might this standoff play out? Does TikTok pose a significant enough national security threat to warrant the forced sale? And how does this situation fit into the broader picture of U.S.-China relations?

Experts discuss.

Featuring:

- Matthew Feeney, Director, Project on Emerging Technologies, The Cato Institute
- Jamil Jaffer, Founder & Executive Director, National Security Institute
- [Moderator] Ashkhen Kazaryan, Director of Civil Liberties, TechFreedom

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2243administrative law & regulatio,intellectual property,international & national secur,regulatory transparency projec,security & privacy,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-131-free-speech-in-the
In May, President Trump issued an Executive Order that directed the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to file a petition for rulemaking with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) proposing regulations to clarify the scope of Section 230. The FCC is currently soliciting public comment on the NTIA petition, which was filed on July 27.

In this live podcast, panelists discuss the background of Section 230 and reflect on whether it continues to encourage innovation and free speech online, or if changes are needed. What should the FCC do to address the pending NTIA petition? And, in light of the upcoming elections, what are the political dynamics at play-at the FCC, in Congress, and in the White House?

Featuring:

- Jon Adame, General Counsel, Office of Sen. Marsha Blackburn
- Hon. Adam Candeub, Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information
- Prof. Eric Goldman, Professor of Law and Co-Director, High Tech Law Institute, Santa Clara University School of Law
- Ashkhen Kazaryan, Director of Civil Liberties, TechFreedom
- [Moderator] Jamie Susskind, Vice President of Policy and Regulatory Affairs, Consumer Technology Association

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/40775430Tue, 08 Sep 2020 15:46:23 +0000The Federalist SocietySection 230 of the Communications Decency Act provides liability protection to platforms, internet service providers, and other online intermediaries for third-party content they host or republish. It also provides liability protections for actions...
In May, President Trump issued an Executive Order that directed the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to file a petition for rulemaking with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) proposing regulations to clarify the scope of Section 230. The FCC is currently soliciting public comment on the NTIA petition, which was filed on July 27.

In this live podcast, panelists discuss the background of Section 230 and reflect on whether it continues to encourage innovation and free speech online, or if changes are needed. What should the FCC do to address the pending NTIA petition? And, in light of the upcoming elections, what are the political dynamics at play-at the FCC, in Congress, and in the White House?

Featuring:

- Jon Adame, General Counsel, Office of Sen. Marsha Blackburn
- Hon. Adam Candeub, Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information
- Prof. Eric Goldman, Professor of Law and Co-Director, High Tech Law Institute, Santa Clara University School of Law
- Ashkhen Kazaryan, Director of Civil Liberties, TechFreedom
- [Moderator] Jamie Susskind, Vice President of Policy and Regulatory Affairs, Consumer Technology Association

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3485administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-130-ftc-v-qualcomm-the
John Shu, a professor, attorney, and legal commentator, discusses the ruling and examines the history, arguments, and ramifications of the case.

Featuring:

John Shu, Attorney and Legal Commentator

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/40680666Thu, 03 Sep 2020 18:12:42 +0000The Federalist SocietyThis live podcast discusses the Ninth Circuit's recent opinion in FTC v. Qualcomm, in which the court reversed the Federal Trade Commission's 2019 trial court win. The Ninth Circuit ruled that Qualcomm did not violate antitrust law through its...
John Shu, a professor, attorney, and legal commentator, discusses the ruling and examines the history, arguments, and ramifications of the case.

Featuring:

John Shu, Attorney and Legal Commentator

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2931administrative law & regulatio,corporations,federal courts,intellectual property,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-129-environmental-citi
Such Supplemental Environmental Projects (or SEPs) are supposed to supplement the government's enforcement actions. But critics - and now DOJ - argue that SEPs often supplant the penalty that the government has sought in its enforcement action. Such provisions, critics say, amount to a delegation of a core executive function that the Constitution vests in the president. It allows private advocacy groups to override the government's enforcement priorities with their own, and then profit from coercive use of penalties that arise under environmental protection laws, the faithful execution of which is entrusted to the president and to the officials under his control. Critics say that any citizen suit claims arising under federal environmental laws that also give rise to enforcement actions should be extinguished when the enforcement action is resolved.

To the extent advocacy groups induce private companies to agree to such SEPs by promising to give up on claims arising under federal environmental laws subject to federal enforcement, should the practice of SEPs be viewed as an unconstitutional infringement on a core executive function? Should the government's ability to extinguish such private claims be viewed as a taking?

Featuring:

- Richard Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law
- Eric Groten, Partner, Vinson & Elkins LLP
- Joel Mintz, Professor Emeritus of Law and C. William Trout Senior Fellow in Public Interest Law, Shepard Broad College of Law, Nova Southeastern University
- [Moderator] Mario Loyola, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/40656755Wed, 02 Sep 2020 18:56:06 +0000The Federalist SocietyEnvironmental laws such as the Clean Air Act allow private plaintiffs and environmental advocacy groups to file citizen suits alongside the government's environmental enforcement actions against polluters. The Environmental and Natural Resources...
Such Supplemental Environmental Projects (or SEPs) are supposed to supplement the government's enforcement actions. But critics - and now DOJ - argue that SEPs often supplant the penalty that the government has sought in its enforcement action. Such provisions, critics say, amount to a delegation of a core executive function that the Constitution vests in the president. It allows private advocacy groups to override the government's enforcement priorities with their own, and then profit from coercive use of penalties that arise under environmental protection laws, the faithful execution of which is entrusted to the president and to the officials under his control. Critics say that any citizen suit claims arising under federal environmental laws that also give rise to enforcement actions should be extinguished when the enforcement action is resolved.

To the extent advocacy groups induce private companies to agree to such SEPs by promising to give up on claims arising under federal environmental laws subject to federal enforcement, should the practice of SEPs be viewed as an unconstitutional infringement on a core executive function? Should the government's ability to extinguish such private claims be viewed as a taking?

Featuring:

- Richard Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law
- Eric Groten, Partner, Vinson & Elkins LLP
- Joel Mintz, Professor Emeritus of Law and C. William Trout Senior Fellow in Public Interest Law, Shepard Broad College of Law, Nova Southeastern University
- [Moderator] Mario Loyola, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3823administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-128-can-states-trump-iThese questions are subject to considerable debate, with significant disagreement even within normally like-minded camps. Some conservatives and liberals alike think there is no such thing as an enforceable Dormant Commerce Clause. Others with various ideological priors view the Dormant Commerce Clause as invalidating only state laws that discriminate in favor of in-state activity over activities in other states. Another view posits that the Dormant Commerce Clause is broader than a non-discrimination principle and should be used to invalidate state laws that unduly burden or interfere with the flow of interstate commerce. And still others take views in between or beyond these positions.
Responding to Professor Donald Kochan’s recent essay in the Notre Dame Law Review Reflection, “The Meaning of Federalism in a System of Interstate Commerce: Free Trade Among the Several States”—an essay that emphasizes that commerce facilitation was a primary driver of the move from the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution—the panelists explore examples of current state laws and regulations that expand a state’s reach into national and international affairs, and they analyze and debate the different interpretations of the Constitution regarding the proper role of the judiciary in evaluating these laws.
Featuring:

Jonathan Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law, Director of the Center for Business Law & Regulation, Case Western Reserve University School of Law
James Coleman, Associate Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law
Donald Kochan, Professor of Law and Deputy Executive Director, Law and Economics Center, 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/40522135Thu, 27 Aug 2020 18:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyAsserting their sovereign interests or “states' rights,” many states are increasingly attempting to inject state officials’ policy preferences on national and global issues through state legislation or regulation on myriad subjects...These questions are subject to considerable debate, with significant disagreement even within normally like-minded camps. Some conservatives and liberals alike think there is no such thing as an enforceable Dormant Commerce Clause. Others with various ideological priors view the Dormant Commerce Clause as invalidating only state laws that discriminate in favor of in-state activity over activities in other states. Another view posits that the Dormant Commerce Clause is broader than a non-discrimination principle and should be used to invalidate state laws that unduly burden or interfere with the flow of interstate commerce. And still others take views in between or beyond these positions.
Responding to Professor Donald Kochan’s recent essay in the Notre Dame Law Review Reflection, “The Meaning of Federalism in a System of Interstate Commerce: Free Trade Among the Several States”—an essay that emphasizes that commerce facilitation was a primary driver of the move from the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution—the panelists explore examples of current state laws and regulations that expand a state’s reach into national and international affairs, and they analyze and debate the different interpretations of the Constitution regarding the proper role of the judiciary in evaluating these laws.
Featuring:

Jonathan Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law, Director of the Center for Business Law & Regulation, Case Western Reserve University School of Law
James Coleman, Associate Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law
Donald Kochan, Professor of Law and Deputy Executive Director, Law and Economics Center, 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.]]>4030administrative law & regulatio,federalism,regulatory transparency projec,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-127-should-the-fed-cre
Now, some are saying the U.S. Federal Reserve should issue its own cryptocurrency, with names like "Fedcoin" and the "digital dollar." Most proposals for this national cryptocurrency also include direct consumer deposit accounts with the Fed.

Proponents give various reasons why the Fed should issue digital currency, from protecting the dollar competition with China to relieving the poor from high bank fees. But opponents cite multiple problems such a system would have from privacy concerns with the Fed having direct access to consumer spending data, to enabling currency manipulation, to crowding out innovation from private cryptocurrencies and payment systems.

Featuring:

- J. Christopher Giancarlo, Senior Counsel, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
- Norbert J. Michel, Director, Center for Data Analysis, Heritage Foundation
- [Moderator] John Berlau, Senior Fellow, Competetive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/40489632Tue, 25 Aug 2020 18:32:44 +0000The Federalist SocietyAs cryptocurrencies have proliferated in the private sector, central banks are now contemplating getting into the game. Venezuela tried unsuccessfully to popularize its currency with the digital petro. China may be more successful with its plan to...
Now, some are saying the U.S. Federal Reserve should issue its own cryptocurrency, with names like "Fedcoin" and the "digital dollar." Most proposals for this national cryptocurrency also include direct consumer deposit accounts with the Fed.

Proponents give various reasons why the Fed should issue digital currency, from protecting the dollar competition with China to relieving the poor from high bank fees. But opponents cite multiple problems such a system would have from privacy concerns with the Fed having direct access to consumer spending data, to enabling currency manipulation, to crowding out innovation from private cryptocurrencies and payment systems.

Featuring:

- J. Christopher Giancarlo, Senior Counsel, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
- Norbert J. Michel, Director, Center for Data Analysis, Heritage Foundation
- [Moderator] John Berlau, Senior Fellow, Competetive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3611administrative law & regulatio,financial services,financial services & e-commerc,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-126-minutes-to-midnigh
What actions should we expect agencies to take? To what extent can the current administration issue "midnight rules" affecting policy beyond January 20? And to what extent could the Congressional Review Act permanently erase those rules?

Featuring:

- Prof. Jack Beermann, Harry Elwood Warren Scholar and Professor of Law, Boston University Law School
- Mr. Daniel Pérez, Senior Policy Analyst, GW Regulatory Studies Center
- [Moderator] Prof. Adam White, Assistant Professor and Executive Director, The C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/40409651Wed, 19 Aug 2020 19:37:12 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe next presidential inauguration will be on January 20, 2021. The six months between then and today will involve a flurry of regulatory activity, just as the final months of presidential terms always do. Whether the next inauguration features Donald...
What actions should we expect agencies to take? To what extent can the current administration issue "midnight rules" affecting policy beyond January 20? And to what extent could the Congressional Review Act permanently erase those rules?

Featuring:

- Prof. Jack Beermann, Harry Elwood Warren Scholar and Professor of Law, Boston University Law School
- Mr. Daniel Pérez, Senior Policy Analyst, GW Regulatory Studies Center
- [Moderator] Prof. Adam White, Assistant Professor and Executive Director, The C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2898administrative law & regulatiocleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-125-the-new-title-ix-r
The new rules require colleges to use more robust procedures when adjudicating student-on-student allegations of sexual assault, including by using a live hearing where representatives of each side can cross-examine adverse witnesses. The rules also narrow the definition of sexual harassment cases that schools must address under Title IX, and limit university liability for off-campus events.

Lawsuits from blue-state Attorneys General and activist groups hope to block all or part of the rules. Three of these lawsuits have sought preliminary injunctions, on grounds that the rules will make it harder to eradicate sexual harassment on campus. These legal challenges also have minimized concerns that colleges currently deny accused students a meaningful chance to defend themselves.

Civil liberties advocates have long advocated a fairer approach to Title IX adjudications, but they recently gained important support in the form of briefs backing the new regulations filed by 15 states, including Texas and Florida. These red and purple states argued that Obama-era policies "trampled the rights of students and created a false choice: either combat sexual harassment or protect constitutional liberties. We propose a different option: do both."

This live podcast discusses and analyzes what this new rulemaking means for students, schools, potential legal challenges, and future administrations.

Featuring:

- [Moderator] Linda Chavez, Chairman, Center for Equal Opportunity
- KC Johnson, Professor of History, Brooklyn College and SUNY Graduate Center
- Stuart S. Taylor Jr., Freelance Journalist and Author

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/40311041Thu, 13 Aug 2020 19:11:28 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn 2017 the Department of Education withdrew the Obama administration's guidance documents on Title IX sexual harassment. The next year it issued a notice of proposed rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act. The department received more than...
The new rules require colleges to use more robust procedures when adjudicating student-on-student allegations of sexual assault, including by using a live hearing where representatives of each side can cross-examine adverse witnesses. The rules also narrow the definition of sexual harassment cases that schools must address under Title IX, and limit university liability for off-campus events.

Lawsuits from blue-state Attorneys General and activist groups hope to block all or part of the rules. Three of these lawsuits have sought preliminary injunctions, on grounds that the rules will make it harder to eradicate sexual harassment on campus. These legal challenges also have minimized concerns that colleges currently deny accused students a meaningful chance to defend themselves.

Civil liberties advocates have long advocated a fairer approach to Title IX adjudications, but they recently gained important support in the form of briefs backing the new regulations filed by 15 states, including Texas and Florida. These red and purple states argued that Obama-era policies "trampled the rights of students and created a false choice: either combat sexual harassment or protect constitutional liberties. We propose a different option: do both."

This live podcast discusses and analyzes what this new rulemaking means for students, schools, potential legal challenges, and future administrations.

Featuring:

- [Moderator] Linda Chavez, Chairman, Center for Equal Opportunity
- KC Johnson, Professor of History, Brooklyn College and SUNY Graduate Center
- Stuart S. Taylor Jr., Freelance Journalist and Author

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3210administrative law & regulatio,due process,education policy,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-124-labor-law-complian
Featuring Tammy McCutchen and G. Roger King, this live podcast reviews federal and state labor and employment issues and options for employers to consider.

Featuring:
- G. Roger King, Senior Labor and Employment Counsel, HR Policy Association
- Tammy McCutchen, Principal, Littler Mendelson PC

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/40250062Mon, 10 Aug 2020 16:20:08 +0000The Federalist SocietyCOVID-19 has created many challenges for employers, including making it more difficult for them to comply with labor and employment laws. Recently-enacted statutes like the First Families Act and the CARES Act, as well as existing laws like the...
Featuring Tammy McCutchen and G. Roger King, this live podcast reviews federal and state labor and employment issues and options for employers to consider.

Featuring:
- G. Roger King, Senior Labor and Employment Counsel, HR Policy Association
- Tammy McCutchen, Principal, Littler Mendelson PC

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3599administrative law & regulatio,labor & employment lawcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-123-antitrust-investig
This live podcast explores what these investigations tell us about innovation and antitrust, as well as the current concerns regarding these firms' market power and conduct. Can current antitrust law and competition policy address this dynamic market? How might antitrust enforcement impact innovation? What do these investigations and calls to break up big tech companies tell us about the future of antitrust enforcement and competition policy?

Featuring:
- Thomas Hazlett, H.H. Macaulay Endowed Professor of Economics, Clemson College of Business
- Jennifer Huddleston, Director of Technology & Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
- Hal Singer, Managing Director, Econ One

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/40174227Thu, 06 Aug 2020 19:13:32 +0000The Federalist SocietyAmerican tech companies like Google, Apple, Facebook, and Amazon are some of the most successful companies in the world. Recently, these companies have faced various criticisms, with some questioning if they are violating the antitrust laws. Antitrust...
This live podcast explores what these investigations tell us about innovation and antitrust, as well as the current concerns regarding these firms' market power and conduct. Can current antitrust law and competition policy address this dynamic market? How might antitrust enforcement impact innovation? What do these investigations and calls to break up big tech companies tell us about the future of antitrust enforcement and competition policy?

Featuring:
- Thomas Hazlett, H.H. Macaulay Endowed Professor of Economics, Clemson College of Business
- Jennifer Huddleston, Director of Technology & Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
- Hal Singer, Managing Director, Econ One

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>4881administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrust,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-122-new-labor-departme
The U.S. Department of Labor is preparing to ensure ESG investing does not undermine protections enshrined in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). A proposed rule would codify in law that asset managers must uphold their fiduciary responsibility when considering ESG investment decisions. The rule states: "It is unlawful for a fiduciary to sacrifice return or accept additional risk to promote a public policy, political, or any other nonpecuniary goal." A comment period ends on July 30.

In this live podcast, J.W. Verret discusses the Labor Department's proposed rules and their implications for retirement security.

Featuring:
- Prof. J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/40019890Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:05:16 +0000The Federalist SocietyA sustained effort by activist investors to align corporate policy and investing with a progressive policy agenda could be shortchanging the retirement savings of millions of Americans. Data show that investments tied to perceived environmental,...
The U.S. Department of Labor is preparing to ensure ESG investing does not undermine protections enshrined in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). A proposed rule would codify in law that asset managers must uphold their fiduciary responsibility when considering ESG investment decisions. The rule states: "It is unlawful for a fiduciary to sacrifice return or accept additional risk to promote a public policy, political, or any other nonpecuniary goal." A comment period ends on July 30.

In this live podcast, J.W. Verret discusses the Labor Department's proposed rules and their implications for retirement security.

Featuring:
- Prof. J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, 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.]]>2913administrative law & regulatio,financial services,labor & employment lawcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-121-book-review-the-du
In this live podcast, Prof. Adam J. White interviews Prof. Epstein about his new book, and then Prof. Epstein fields caller questions on administrative law.

Featuring:
- [Moderator] Prof. Adam J. White, Assistant Professor and Executive Director, The C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University
- Prof. Richard Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/39903408Wed, 22 Jul 2020 13:00:53 +0000The Federalist SocietyProf. Richard Epstein's The Dubious Morality of Modern Administrative Law examines how the growth of the administrative state as a result of FDR's New Deal has coincided with many different Supreme Court decisions since the 1936-37 term of the Court...
In this live podcast, Prof. Adam J. White interviews Prof. Epstein about his new book, and then Prof. Epstein fields caller questions on administrative law.

Featuring:
- [Moderator] Prof. Adam J. White, Assistant Professor and Executive Director, The C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University
- Prof. Richard Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3586administrative law & regulatio,the practice groupscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/ftc-rulemaking-underutilized-tool-or-nat
Opening Remarks:
- Noah Phillips, Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission

Panel Featuring:
- James Cooper, Associate Professor of Law and Director, Program on Economics & Privacy, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
- William MacLeod, Partner, Kelly, Drye & Warren LLP
- Joshua Wright, Executive Director, Global Antitrust Institute, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
- [Moderator] Svetlana Gans, Vice President & Associate General Counsel, NCTA
- [Introduction] Nathan Kaczmarek, Director, Article I Initiative | Director, Regulatory Transparency Project

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

As always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speakers.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/39511747Mon, 13 Jul 2020 11:55:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThis expert panel examined recent calls for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to engage in substantive rulemaking under the competition and consumer-protection prongs of Section 5 of the FTC Act. How far does FTC statutory authority under 6(g)...
Opening Remarks:
- Noah Phillips, Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission

Panel Featuring:
- James Cooper, Associate Professor of Law and Director, Program on Economics & Privacy, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
- William MacLeod, Partner, Kelly, Drye & Warren LLP
- Joshua Wright, Executive Director, Global Antitrust Institute, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
- [Moderator] Svetlana Gans, Vice President & Associate General Counsel, NCTA
- [Introduction] Nathan Kaczmarek, Director, Article I Initiative | Director, Regulatory Transparency Project

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

As always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speakers.]]>5783administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/ftc-remedial-authority-powers-process-anFeaturing:

James Cooper, Associate Professor of Law and Director, Program on Economics & Privacy, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
Andrew Stivers, Deputy Director for Consumer Protection, Bureau of Economics, Federal Trade Commission
Berin Szóka, Senior Fellow, TechFreedom
John Villafranco, Partner, Kelly, Drye & Warren LLP
[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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/37186983Tue, 07 Jul 2020 16:00:08 +0000The Federalist SocietyHow does the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) calculate consumer injury and civil penalties in consumer protection matters? This teleforum will discuss the FTC’s remedial powers, process, and suggestions for reform, including how the Supreme...Featuring:

James Cooper, Associate Professor of Law and Director, Program on Economics & Privacy, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
Andrew Stivers, Deputy Director for Consumer Protection, Bureau of Economics, Federal Trade Commission
Berin Szóka, Senior Fellow, TechFreedom
John Villafranco, Partner, Kelly, Drye & Warren LLP
[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.]]>4253administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-15-racial-preferences-
Featuring:
- Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/35416793Thu, 02 Jul 2020 09:23:13 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, the federal government is waiving affirmative action requirements in federal construction projects. Wen Fa discusses whether state and local regulations should follow suit. Featuring: - Wen Fa, Attorney,...
Featuring:
- Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1208cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/can-patents-and-bayh-dole-fuel-innovatiohttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/34915060Wed, 24 Jun 2020 11:47:00 +0000The Federalist Society3515administrative law & regulatio,intellectual property,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/how-to-approach-data-collection-and-brea
Increased visibility into the virus’s spread appears crucial to public health authorities’ efforts but concerns have been raised that such widespread data collection activities may be overly intrusive and that privacy interests have not been adequately considered in the effort to stop the spread of this virus. Further, some question the security of personal health data, especially as hackers and cyber-criminals turn their attention towards these new surveillance programs.

In this podcast, our panel of experts explores these important issues and more.

Featuring:

- Drew Bagley, Vice President and Counsel for Privacy and Cyber Policy, CrowdStrike
- Neil Chilson, Senior Research Fellow for Technology and Innovation, Charles Koch Institute
- Roger Klein, Faculty Fellow, Center for Law, Science & Innovation, Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/32462073Mon, 22 Jun 2020 12:18:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn an effort to combat the spread of COVID-19 and contain its impact, nations across the world are exploring the use of various methods of tracking the virus. Some – such as Singapore and South Korea – have established national surveillance networks...
Increased visibility into the virus’s spread appears crucial to public health authorities’ efforts but concerns have been raised that such widespread data collection activities may be overly intrusive and that privacy interests have not been adequately considered in the effort to stop the spread of this virus. Further, some question the security of personal health data, especially as hackers and cyber-criminals turn their attention towards these new surveillance programs.

In this podcast, our panel of experts explores these important issues and more.

Featuring:

- Drew Bagley, Vice President and Counsel for Privacy and Cyber Policy, CrowdStrike
- Neil Chilson, Senior Research Fellow for Technology and Innovation, Charles Koch Institute
- Roger Klein, Faculty Fellow, Center for Law, Science & Innovation, Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3719administrative law & regulatio,healthcare,regulatory transparency projec,security & privacy,state governments,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-10-trumps-executive-order-o
Featuring:
- [Host] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- Ashkhen Kazaryan, Director of Civil Liberties, TechFreedom
- Neil Chilson, Senior Research Fellow for Technology and Innovation, Charles Koch Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/29902411Mon, 08 Jun 2020 12:52:42 +0000The Federalist SocietyWhat is the legislative and legal background of the recent Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship, how will it affect Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, and what may be the unforeseen consequences of this move? These and other...
Featuring:
- [Host] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- Ashkhen Kazaryan, Director of Civil Liberties, TechFreedom
- Neil Chilson, Senior Research Fellow for Technology and Innovation, Charles Koch Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1913administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-116-surviving-covid-19
Featuring:
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/29013522Wed, 03 Jun 2020 14:33:03 +0000The Federalist SocietyAs 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...
Featuring:
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1776administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-115-public-private-partnership
Many in the cybersecurity space see the path forward as including more public-private partnerships since private companies are often more directly impacted by cybercrime than the federal government and can be more dynamic in their responses.

However, given the criticism of these partnerships in the past, are they truly the best way to protect the public? In this time of quarantine, American society has become more dependent on internet technology, so examining how our nation protects itself and its companies digitally has never been more important.

Are public-private partnerships the best way to fight cybercrime? If not, can the government alone protect the nation from cybercrime? If these partnerships are the way of the future, how could they be improved? This episode will discuss these important questions and more.

Featuring:
- Dmitri Alperovitch, Co-Founder & Former CTO, CrowdStrike
- Jamil Jaffer, Adjunct Professor, NSI Founder, and Director, National Security Law & Policy Program, Antonin Scalia Law School

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/28831382Mon, 01 Jun 2020 13:00:55 +0000The Federalist SocietyWhile most agree cybersecurity is a vital part of modern national security and see cyber-attacks as an evolving and dangerous threat, the question of how best to utilize the resources of the United States to protect the nation against cyber-attacks is...
Many in the cybersecurity space see the path forward as including more public-private partnerships since private companies are often more directly impacted by cybercrime than the federal government and can be more dynamic in their responses.

However, given the criticism of these partnerships in the past, are they truly the best way to protect the public? In this time of quarantine, American society has become more dependent on internet technology, so examining how our nation protects itself and its companies digitally has never been more important.

Are public-private partnerships the best way to fight cybercrime? If not, can the government alone protect the nation from cybercrime? If these partnerships are the way of the future, how could they be improved? This episode will discuss these important questions and more.

Featuring:
- Dmitri Alperovitch, Co-Founder & Former CTO, CrowdStrike
- Jamil Jaffer, Adjunct Professor, NSI Founder, and Director, National Security Law & Policy Program, Antonin Scalia Law School

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3714administrative law & regulatio,international & national secur,regulatory transparency projec,security & privacy,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/podcast-deep-dive-episode-113-is-artific
Do we assume the worst about decisions with a disparate impact – applying a kind of misanthropomorphism to the machine – or can we objectively analyze the factors behind the decisions? If bias boils down to not producing proportionate results for each protected class, is the only remedy to impose a “proportionate result” constraint on AI processing – essentially imposing racial, ethnic, and gender quotas on every corner of life that is touched by AI?

Featuring:
- Stewart Baker, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
- Curt Levey, President, Committee for Justice
- Nicholas Weaver, Researcher, International Computer Science Institute and Lecturer, UC Berkeley

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/28659698Fri, 29 May 2020 13:00:59 +0000The Federalist SocietyJournalists and academics seem convinced that artificial intelligence is often biased against women and racial minorities. If Washington’s new facial recognition law is a guide, legislators see the same problem. But is it true? It’s not hard to find...
Do we assume the worst about decisions with a disparate impact – applying a kind of misanthropomorphism to the machine – or can we objectively analyze the factors behind the decisions? If bias boils down to not producing proportionate results for each protected class, is the only remedy to impose a “proportionate result” constraint on AI processing – essentially imposing racial, ethnic, and gender quotas on every corner of life that is touched by AI?

Featuring:
- Stewart Baker, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
- Curt Levey, President, Committee for Justice
- Nicholas Weaver, Researcher, International Computer Science Institute and Lecturer, UC Berkeley

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3748administrative law & regulatio,civil rights,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-113-executive-orders-o

Featuring:
- Hon. Steven Bradbury, General Counsel (and performing the functions and duties of Deputy Secretary), U.S. Department of Transportation
- John Walke, Director, Clean Air Project, Climate & Clean Air Program, Natural Resources Defense Council
- Prof. Adam White, Assistant Professor and Executive Director, The C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/28544882Thu, 28 May 2020 10:59:47 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn October of 2019, President Trump issued an executive order that imposed a series of restrictions and requirements on Federal agencies, and even included a requirement that agencies publish their guidance on the internet. The purpose of the...

Featuring:
- Hon. Steven Bradbury, General Counsel (and performing the functions and duties of Deputy Secretary), U.S. Department of Transportation
- John Walke, Director, Clean Air Project, Climate & Clean Air Program, Natural Resources Defense Council
- Prof. Adam White, Assistant Professor and Executive Director, The C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3652administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-14-options-for-data-privacy-en
Featuring:
- Ian Adams, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics
- Jennifer Huddleston, Director of Technology and Innovation Policy, American Action Forum

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/28055054Fri, 22 May 2020 09:54:01 +0000The Federalist SocietyHow can data privacy enforcement provide clarity for businesses while protecting the public from harm? What might be the best enforcement options available to the FTC and state attorneys general going forward? Jennifer Huddleston and Ian Adams...
Featuring:
- Ian Adams, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics
- Jennifer Huddleston, Director of Technology and Innovation Policy, American Action Forum

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1953administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,security & privacy,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/ftc-hot-topics-with-commissioner-christihttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/27972102Thu, 21 May 2020 11:29:00 +0000The Federalist Society2055administrative law & regulatio,corporations,healthcare,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrust,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-111-the-truth-about-th
Featuring:
- Dr. Richard B. Belzer, Associate Fellow, R Street Institute
- Prof. Adam White, Assistant Professor and Executive Director, The C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School
- [Moderator] Daren Bakst, Senior Research Fellow, The Heritage Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/27418077Fri, 15 May 2020 11:01:04 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn 2018, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed a rule entitled “Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science.” The proposal garnered over 9,000 unique public comments. On March 18, 2020, EPA published a supplemental notice of proposed...
Featuring:
- Dr. Richard B. Belzer, Associate Fellow, R Street Institute
- Prof. Adam White, Assistant Professor and Executive Director, The C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School
- [Moderator] Daren Bakst, Senior Research Fellow, The Heritage Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3231administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,environmental law & property r,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/community-reinvestment-act-remedy-or-relhttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/27332114Thu, 14 May 2020 11:02:00 +0000The Federalist Society3213administrative law & regulatio,financial services,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-13-covid19-contact-tra
Featuring:
- Jennifer Huddleston, Director of Technology & Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/27163257Tue, 12 May 2020 10:17:56 +0000The Federalist SocietyAs countries, states, and locales have worked to get a handle on the spread of the COVID19 pandemic, one solution that appears to have been effective is thorough contact-tracing. In this episode, Jennifer Huddleston and Brent Skorup discuss how...
Featuring:
- Jennifer Huddleston, Director of Technology & Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1730administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,security & privacy,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/regulating-by-consent-agreement-examinin
FTC settlements have long been praised by those who value the “soft law” benefits of such an approach: flexibility to deal with case-by-case specific problems, particularly in fast-changing industries; reduced need to establish one-size-fits-all industry-wide rules; efficient resolution of cases; the ability to shape future behavior through a kind of common law. Such settlements have also long been criticized by those who emphasize the difference between them and hard law: a creation of regulatory ambiguity; lack of process that considers the interests of the full range of stakeholders; a “rulemaking” environment with a power differential between the negotiating parties; and an agency ability to accumulate incremental changes to the law that in total can be quite significant.

This episode explores FTC settlements and consent decrees, including the YouTube case and what it means for FTC enforcement going forward. It will take place as part of the Federalist Society's Executive Branch Review Week.

Featuring:
- Jessica Rich, Distinguished Fellow, Institute for Technology Law & Policy, Georgetown Law
- Sean Royall, Partner, Kirkland & Ellis LLP
- Gerard Stegmaier, Partner, Reed Smith LLP
- [Moderator] Neil Chilson, Senior Research Fellow for Technology and Innovation, Charles Koch Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/26695703Mon, 04 May 2020 13:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn September 4, 2019, the Federal Trade Commission announced sweeping regulatory changes to the operation of YouTube, one of the internet’s most popular websites. YouTube has 2 billion monthly active users and features content from more than 50...
FTC settlements have long been praised by those who value the “soft law” benefits of such an approach: flexibility to deal with case-by-case specific problems, particularly in fast-changing industries; reduced need to establish one-size-fits-all industry-wide rules; efficient resolution of cases; the ability to shape future behavior through a kind of common law. Such settlements have also long been criticized by those who emphasize the difference between them and hard law: a creation of regulatory ambiguity; lack of process that considers the interests of the full range of stakeholders; a “rulemaking” environment with a power differential between the negotiating parties; and an agency ability to accumulate incremental changes to the law that in total can be quite significant.

This episode explores FTC settlements and consent decrees, including the YouTube case and what it means for FTC enforcement going forward. It will take place as part of the Federalist Society's Executive Branch Review Week.

Featuring:
- Jessica Rich, Distinguished Fellow, Institute for Technology Law & Policy, Georgetown Law
- Sean Royall, Partner, Kirkland & Ellis LLP
- Gerard Stegmaier, Partner, Reed Smith LLP
- [Moderator] Neil Chilson, Senior Research Fellow for Technology and Innovation, Charles Koch Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3636administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-108-regulating-home-sh
Featuring:
- Brooks Rainwater, Senior Executive & Director, Center for City Solutions, National League of Cities
- Jon Riches, Director of National Litigation, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/26286660Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Brooks Rainwater and Jon Riches discuss developments in state and local regulations surrounding home-sharing and home-based businesses. How do we balance safety and public goods with innovation and entrepreneurialism? Featuring: -...
Featuring:
- Brooks Rainwater, Senior Executive & Director, Center for City Solutions, National League of Cities
- Jon Riches, Director of National Litigation, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3124administrative law & regulatio,environmental law & property r,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-9-covid-19-and-the-internet
Featuring:
- Ajit Pai, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- [Host] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/26206705Mon, 27 Apr 2020 10:56:53 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Ajit Pai joins Adam Thierer and Brent Skorup to discuss the principles driving the Federal Communications Commission in recent years, the "Keep Americans Connected" pledge, and how things have changed for the FCC in the midst of the...
Featuring:
- Ajit Pai, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- [Host] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2110administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/covid-19-in-the-workplace-mandated-paid-_1
Featuring:
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center
- James A. Paretti, Shareholder, Littler Mendelson P.C.

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/26015664Fri, 24 Apr 2020 12:08:57 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn March 18, the Senate passed and the President signed into law the “Families First Coronavirus Response Act.” Among other things, this new law, set to take effect no later than April 2, 2020, creates a new paid sick leave mandate for all employers...
Featuring:
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center
- James A. Paretti, Shareholder, Littler Mendelson P.C.

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2684administrative law & regulatio,labor & employment law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-105-should-big-tech-pl
Featuring:
- Adam Candeub, Michigan State University College of Law
- Carrie Goldberg, C. A. Goldberg PLLC
- Arthur Milikh, Heritage Foundation
- Nadine Strossen, New York Law School
- Moderator: Neil Chilson, Charles Koch Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/25846327Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:13:01 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn March 4, 2020, the Regulatory Transparency Project sponsored a symposium with the University of Pennsylvania Federalist Society student chapter. The second panel of the symposium was titled "Should Social Media Platforms Be Viewpoint Neutral?...
Featuring:
- Adam Candeub, Michigan State University College of Law
- Carrie Goldberg, C. A. Goldberg PLLC
- Arthur Milikh, Heritage Foundation
- Nadine Strossen, New York Law School
- Moderator: Neil Chilson, Charles Koch Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>4180administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-105-do-we-need-to-reth
Featuring:
- Roger Alford, Notre Dame University
- Jay Himes, Labaton Sucharow LLP
- Salil Mehra, Temple University School of Law
- Moderator: Christopher Yoo, University of Pennsylvania Carey School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/25608991Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:51:51 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn March 4, 2020, the Regulatory Transparency Project sponsored a symposium with the University of Pennsylvania Federalist Society student chapter. The first panel of the symposium was titled "Do We Need to Rethink Antitrust for Big Tech?" Featuring:...
Featuring:
- Roger Alford, Notre Dame University
- Jay Himes, Labaton Sucharow LLP
- Salil Mehra, Temple University School of Law
- Moderator: Christopher Yoo, University of Pennsylvania Carey School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>4919administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-104-the-allen-v-cooper
Featuring:
- Prof. John T. Cross, Grosscurth Professor of Intellectual Property Law and Technology Transfer, University of Louisville Brandeis School of Law
- Prof. Ralph Oman, Pravel, Hewitt, Kimball and Kreiger Professorial Lecturer in Intellectual Property and Patent Law
- Prof. Steven Tepp, Professorial Lecturer in Law, George Washington Law, and President and Founder of Sentinal Worldwide
- Prof. Ernest A. Young, Alston & Bird Professor, Duke Law School

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/25496251Tue, 14 Apr 2020 12:11:57 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe recent Supreme Court ruling in Allen v. Cooper is the latest development in a decades-long series of Congressional enactments and Supreme Court rulings over whether and how Congress can abrogate the sovereign immunity of States from intellectual...
Featuring:
- Prof. John T. Cross, Grosscurth Professor of Intellectual Property Law and Technology Transfer, University of Louisville Brandeis School of Law
- Prof. Ralph Oman, Pravel, Hewitt, Kimball and Kreiger Professorial Lecturer in Intellectual Property and Patent Law
- Prof. Steven Tepp, Professorial Lecturer in Law, George Washington Law, and President and Founder of Sentinal Worldwide
- Prof. Ernest A. Young, Alston & Bird Professor, Duke Law School

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3685cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-103-ajit-pai-the-fcc-a
Featuring:
- Ajit Pai, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/25420478Mon, 13 Apr 2020 14:49:11 +0000The Federalist SocietyJoin us as Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai discusses how the FCC is addressing the COVID-19 pandemic. What measures has the FCC taken to date, and what is planned in the future? Featuring: - Ajit Pai, Chairman, Federal...
Featuring:
- Ajit Pai, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3358cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-102-capital-conversati
Featuring:
- Eric Hargan, Deputy Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/25155308Thu, 09 Apr 2020 12:13:26 +0000The Federalist SocietyJoin us as the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Deputy Secretary Eric Hargan discusses the role of his agency. Likely topics include COVID-19, as well as the agency’s regulatory reform efforts. Featuring: - Eric Hargan, Deputy Secretary...
Featuring:
- Eric Hargan, Deputy Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1985administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/litigation-update-neora-v-ftc
Later on the same day, the FTC filed suit against Neora in New Jersey. The FTC asserts that Neora was unlike legitimate MLMs and was a “pyramid scheme” since its inception. The FTC argues that the company has focused on recruiting new distributors or so-called brand partners (BPs) and the vast majority of them don’t earn anything after expenses and quit.

Neora Co-CEO Deborah Heisz and lead litigation counsel Ed Burbach of Foley & Lardner will join us to describe their last four years of interactions with the FTC and the ultimate “fencing in” proposal that lead them to file suit.

Featuring:
- Ed Burbach, Partner, Foley & Lardner LLP
- Deborah Heisz, Co-CEO, Neora

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/24929536Tue, 07 Apr 2020 12:00:45 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn November 1, 2019, Neora, a Texas-based healthcare products multi-level marketing (MLM) business, filed suit in Illinois Federal Court against the FTC. The suit alleges that throughout three years of enforcement actions, the agency attempted to...
Later on the same day, the FTC filed suit against Neora in New Jersey. The FTC asserts that Neora was unlike legitimate MLMs and was a “pyramid scheme” since its inception. The FTC argues that the company has focused on recruiting new distributors or so-called brand partners (BPs) and the vast majority of them don’t earn anything after expenses and quit.

Neora Co-CEO Deborah Heisz and lead litigation counsel Ed Burbach of Foley & Lardner will join us to describe their last four years of interactions with the FTC and the ultimate “fencing in” proposal that lead them to file suit.

Featuring:
- Ed Burbach, Partner, Foley & Lardner LLP
- Deborah Heisz, Co-CEO, Neora

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>4370administrative law & regulatio,litigation,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/the-limits-of-epa-authority-supplemental
Featuring:
- Jeffrey Clark, Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD), Department of Justice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/24891446Mon, 06 Apr 2020 13:14:03 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice recently announced a policy that the Division would no longer agree to Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) in settlement agreements or judicial consent decrees...
Featuring:
- Jeffrey Clark, Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD), Department of Justice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2851administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,environmental law & property r,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-99-promoting-a-more-ad
This episode will examine the current process for educating, training, and licensing physicians in the US, with a focus on whether the current process is sufficiently flexible to adjust as needed to accommodate changing demand by patients. James Capretta, the author of a recent paper on the subject ("Promoting a More Adaptable Physician Pipeline" released as part of the Regulatory Transparency Project), and Chris Pope, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, will briefly discuss the historical context of the US' licensing system, the basic steps that are involved, the federal government's role in financing residency training, the immigration rules for foreign-born physicians, and policies that might make the current system more flexible and adaptable to changing societal needs.

Featuring:
- James C. Capretta, Resident Fellow and Milton Friedman Chair, American Enterprise Institute
- Chris Pope, Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/24790092Fri, 03 Apr 2020 13:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe COVID-19 pandemic has the medical community scrambling to address shortages of supplies and some clinicians to properly care for all of the many patients who will present soon with significant symptoms. Among the problems is a lack of sufficient...
This episode will examine the current process for educating, training, and licensing physicians in the US, with a focus on whether the current process is sufficiently flexible to adjust as needed to accommodate changing demand by patients. James Capretta, the author of a recent paper on the subject ("Promoting a More Adaptable Physician Pipeline" released as part of the Regulatory Transparency Project), and Chris Pope, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, will briefly discuss the historical context of the US' licensing system, the basic steps that are involved, the federal government's role in financing residency training, the immigration rules for foreign-born physicians, and policies that might make the current system more flexible and adaptable to changing societal needs.

Featuring:
- James C. Capretta, Resident Fellow and Milton Friedman Chair, American Enterprise Institute
- Chris Pope, Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3903administrative law & regulatio,healthcare,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-98-regulatory-reforms-https://www.rstreet.org/2020/03/18/small-regulatory-reforms-that-can-help-people-during-the-pandemic/), as early reports suggested that federal agencies may have prevented private testing for COVID-19 before slowly issuing approval.

Others are calling for state-level reforms, such as changes to occupational licensing requirements. Existing occupational licensing laws arguably restrict medical professionals, including nurses and pharmacists, from practicing to the full scope of their training by limiting what duties they can take on and making nurses practice under doctor supervision. Licenses rarely transfer across state lines. This means that qualified doctors in one state cannot practice in other states, severely restricting their ability to provide telehealth services to potential patients. Advocates posit that these doctors should be allowed to prioritize the most pressing cases on telehealth. Many states have implemented emergency reforms regarding these issues to help prevent physician burnout and make sure medical professionals can focus their energies where needed.

Municipal-level reforms are also being discussed as vital to avoid penalizing residents for acting responsibly. In many localities, working from home requires the worker to overcome regulatory requirements. Some view this as generally unwise but are now drawing even greater attention to the topic because Americans are being urged to stay inside.

Further, while some regulations like parking limits make perfect sense in normal times, is suspending such rules worth considering in the current environment? This episode will discuss these issues and more.

Featuring:
- David Hyman, Scott K. Ginsburg Professor of Health Law & Policy, Georgetown University
- Roger Klein, Faculty Fellow, Center for Law, Science & Innovation, Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law
- Shoshana Weissmann, Senior Manager of Digital Media and Fellow, R Street Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/24635660Mon, 30 Mar 2020 11:30:14 +0000The Federalist SocietyGovernments at all levels are figuring out how to make sure sick people are treated and that coronavirus doesn’t spread. Some experts are now drawing attention to possible regulatory reforms...https://www.rstreet.org/2020/03/18/small-regulatory-reforms-that-can-help-people-during-the-pandemic/), as early reports suggested that federal agencies may have prevented private testing for COVID-19 before slowly issuing approval.

Others are calling for state-level reforms, such as changes to occupational licensing requirements. Existing occupational licensing laws arguably restrict medical professionals, including nurses and pharmacists, from practicing to the full scope of their training by limiting what duties they can take on and making nurses practice under doctor supervision. Licenses rarely transfer across state lines. This means that qualified doctors in one state cannot practice in other states, severely restricting their ability to provide telehealth services to potential patients. Advocates posit that these doctors should be allowed to prioritize the most pressing cases on telehealth. Many states have implemented emergency reforms regarding these issues to help prevent physician burnout and make sure medical professionals can focus their energies where needed.

Municipal-level reforms are also being discussed as vital to avoid penalizing residents for acting responsibly. In many localities, working from home requires the worker to overcome regulatory requirements. Some view this as generally unwise but are now drawing even greater attention to the topic because Americans are being urged to stay inside.

Further, while some regulations like parking limits make perfect sense in normal times, is suspending such rules worth considering in the current environment? This episode will discuss these issues and more.

Featuring:
- David Hyman, Scott K. Ginsburg Professor of Health Law & Policy, Georgetown University
- Roger Klein, Faculty Fellow, Center for Law, Science & Innovation, Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law
- Shoshana Weissmann, Senior Manager of Digital Media and Fellow, R Street Institute

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3522administrative law & regulatio,healthcare,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-8-the-future-of-facial-reco
Featuring:
- Ashkhen Kazryan, Director of Civil Liberties, TechFreedom
- Caleb Watney, Fellow, Technology and Innovation, R Street Institute
- [Moderator] Matthew Feeney, Director, Project on Emerging Technologies, Cato Institute

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

Additional Resources:
- Brookings Institution: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/techtank/2019/06/20/what-are-the-proper-limits-on-police-use-of-facial-recognition/
- Cato Institute: https://www.cato.org/blog/should-police-facial-recognition-be-banned
- Tech Policy Corner: https://techpolicycorner.org/creeped-out-congress-grills-fbi-on-facial-recognition-tech-37a1123f48f8]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/24387973Thu, 26 Mar 2020 12:55:30 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Matthew Feeney hosts a discussion with Ashkhen Kazaryan and Caleb Watney on the approach regulators might take to the brave new world of facial recognition technology. Featuring: - Ashkhen Kazryan, Director of Civil Liberties,...
Featuring:
- Ashkhen Kazryan, Director of Civil Liberties, TechFreedom
- Caleb Watney, Fellow, Technology and Innovation, R Street Institute
- [Moderator] Matthew Feeney, Director, Project on Emerging Technologies, Cato Institute

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

Additional Resources:
- Brookings Institution: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/techtank/2019/06/20/what-are-the-proper-limits-on-police-use-of-facial-recognition/
- Cato Institute: https://www.cato.org/blog/should-police-facial-recognition-be-banned
- Tech Policy Corner: https://techpolicycorner.org/creeped-out-congress-grills-fbi-on-facial-recognition-tech-37a1123f48f8]]>1961cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-97-new-york-s-rent-sta
This episode discusses recent and current state CON law litigation, including the pending Singh v. North Carolina Dept of Health & Human Services matter.


Featuring:
- Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater Institute
- Josh Windham, Attorney, Institute for Justice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/24214967Mon, 23 Mar 2020 12:51:27 +0000The Federalist Society38 states have certificate of need (CON) laws which make it illegal for healthcare providers to offer healthcare services to patients without first getting government permission. Defenders of CON laws assert that they are needed to control healthcare...
This episode discusses recent and current state CON law litigation, including the pending Singh v. North Carolina Dept of Health & Human Services matter.


Featuring:
- Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater Institute
- Josh Windham, Attorney, Institute for Justice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3152cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-96-new-york-s-rent-sta
A lawsuit filed last year asserts that the New York law—including 2019 amendments that significantly increased the restrictions on property owners—violates due process and effects both physical and regulatory takings of the property that it regulates. New York City, New York State, and tenant advocacy groups have moved to dismiss the action.

Rent control is not just a New York phenomenon. Other cities across the country have enacted, or are considering, rent regulation legislation. Andrew Pincus, lead counsel for the plaintiffs, and Prof. Richard Epstein, of New York University School of Law, will discuss the constitutional challenge in the context of the Supreme Court’s evolving property rights jurisprudence.

Featuring:
- Prof. Richard Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law
- Andrew Pincus, Partner, Mayer Brown LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/24099689Fri, 20 Mar 2020 11:38:03 +0000The Federalist SocietyDoes New York’s “rent stabilization” law violate the federal Constitution? The law, which regulates approximately 1 million apartments in New York City, was enacted more than fifty years ago and remains in effect based on an every-three-year...
A lawsuit filed last year asserts that the New York law—including 2019 amendments that significantly increased the restrictions on property owners—violates due process and effects both physical and regulatory takings of the property that it regulates. New York City, New York State, and tenant advocacy groups have moved to dismiss the action.

Rent control is not just a New York phenomenon. Other cities across the country have enacted, or are considering, rent regulation legislation. Andrew Pincus, lead counsel for the plaintiffs, and Prof. Richard Epstein, of New York University School of Law, will discuss the constitutional challenge in the context of the Supreme Court’s evolving property rights jurisprudence.

Featuring:
- Prof. Richard Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law
- Andrew Pincus, Partner, Mayer Brown LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3361administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-12-a-recipe-for-a-bett
Featuring:
- Jeff Stier, Senior Fellow, Consumer Choice Center and Taxpayers Protection Alliance

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/24055152Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:39:04 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this Explainer episode, Jeff Stier tells the innovative story of Impossible Burger, a company that developed leghemoglobin to mimic the taste of meat in non-meat-based products. Instead of rushing to regulate this new development, FDA took a...
Featuring:
- Jeff Stier, Senior Fellow, Consumer Choice Center and Taxpayers Protection Alliance

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1772cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/update-on-fisa-reauthorization-and-refor
This decision point comes at a time of heightened scrutiny, given the recent Department of Justice Inspector General report addressing the FBI's use of FISA while investigating the 2016 presidential election and a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review order expressing "serious concerns about the accuracy and completeness" of the FBI's FISA applications in that case. Please join us for a timely discussion of the mechanics and processes of FISA, recent controversies, and issues Congress will consider as it determines whether and how to renew these key provisions.

Featuring:
- Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice
- Nathan Leamer, Vice President of Public Affairs, Targeted Victory

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23951135Mon, 16 Mar 2020 14:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn March 15, 2020, certain authorities under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) will expire absent renewal by Congress. The authorities set to expire fall into three categories: 1) the business records provision (often referred to as...
This decision point comes at a time of heightened scrutiny, given the recent Department of Justice Inspector General report addressing the FBI's use of FISA while investigating the 2016 presidential election and a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review order expressing "serious concerns about the accuracy and completeness" of the FBI's FISA applications in that case. Please join us for a timely discussion of the mechanics and processes of FISA, recent controversies, and issues Congress will consider as it determines whether and how to renew these key provisions.

Featuring:
- Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice
- Nathan Leamer, Vice President of Public Affairs, Targeted Victory

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2713administrative law & regulatio,international & national secur,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-93-ftc-v-qualcomm
Judge Lucy Koh held a bench trial in January 2019 and issued a decision in favor of the FTC in May 2019. In a lengthy opinion, the court determined that Qualcomm’s “no license, no chips” policy violated antitrust law and that Qualcomm had a separate antitrust duty to deal with its competitors. Judge Koh then issued an injunction that, among other things, prohibited Qualcomm from conditioning the supply of chips on a customer’s patent-license status and required Qualcomm to negotiate and make available licenses on FRAND terms.

Qualcomm appealed to the Ninth Circuit. In August 2019, the Ninth Circuit issued an order partially staying Judge Koh’s injunction. According to the Ninth Circuit, “Qualcomm has shown, at a minimum, the presence of serious questions on the merits” of the district court’s opinion. Additionally, the Ninth Circuit needs to decide whether the district court’s “order and injunction represent a trailblazing application of the antitrust laws, or instead an improper excursion beyond the outer limits of the Sherman Act.”

While these issues alone would be interesting, this case is even more intriguing because the Department of Justice (DOJ) has intervened in the case – in favor of Qualcomm. The DOJ filed an amicus brief in favor of the stay of injunction, as well as an amicus brief on the merits. The Ninth Circuit has also granted DOJ’s request for five minutes of oral argument time. Oral argument in the Ninth Circuit is set for February 13, 2020.

This episode will recap the district court’s decision, discuss the arguments likely to be made on appeal, and explore the bigger issues this case brings up for antitrust policy.

Featuring:
- Hon. F. Scott Kieff, Fred C. Stevenson Research Professor of Law and Director, Planning and Publications, Center for Law, Economics, & Finance, George Washington University Law School
- Prof. Kristen Osenga, Austin E. Owen Research Scholar & Professor of Law, The 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23795456Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:39:34 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn January 2017, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed an antitrust complaint against Qualcomm in the Northern District of California. The FTC alleged that Qualcomm had unlawfully monopolized the market for certain semiconductors important in...
Judge Lucy Koh held a bench trial in January 2019 and issued a decision in favor of the FTC in May 2019. In a lengthy opinion, the court determined that Qualcomm’s “no license, no chips” policy violated antitrust law and that Qualcomm had a separate antitrust duty to deal with its competitors. Judge Koh then issued an injunction that, among other things, prohibited Qualcomm from conditioning the supply of chips on a customer’s patent-license status and required Qualcomm to negotiate and make available licenses on FRAND terms.

Qualcomm appealed to the Ninth Circuit. In August 2019, the Ninth Circuit issued an order partially staying Judge Koh’s injunction. According to the Ninth Circuit, “Qualcomm has shown, at a minimum, the presence of serious questions on the merits” of the district court’s opinion. Additionally, the Ninth Circuit needs to decide whether the district court’s “order and injunction represent a trailblazing application of the antitrust laws, or instead an improper excursion beyond the outer limits of the Sherman Act.”

While these issues alone would be interesting, this case is even more intriguing because the Department of Justice (DOJ) has intervened in the case – in favor of Qualcomm. The DOJ filed an amicus brief in favor of the stay of injunction, as well as an amicus brief on the merits. The Ninth Circuit has also granted DOJ’s request for five minutes of oral argument time. Oral argument in the Ninth Circuit is set for February 13, 2020.

This episode will recap the district court’s decision, discuss the arguments likely to be made on appeal, and explore the bigger issues this case brings up for antitrust policy.

Featuring:
- Hon. F. Scott Kieff, Fred C. Stevenson Research Professor of Law and Director, Planning and Publications, Center for Law, Economics, & Finance, George Washington University Law School
- Prof. Kristen Osenga, Austin E. Owen Research Scholar & Professor of Law, The 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.]]>2399cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-93-the-future-of-the-n
Proponents of NEPA argue that changes to the NEPA review process would threaten sensitive wildlife habitats and roll back protections against climate change. Others argue, however, that the current NEPA process unnecessarily delays critical infrastructure projects, such as the building of highways, roads, pipelines, and telecommunications networks, without any material benefit in return.

In this episode, Professors David Adelman and James Coleman will discuss the recently proposed changes to the NEPA process and examine the potential effects.

Featuring:
- David Adelman, Harry Reasoner Regents Chair in Law, The University of Texas at Austin School of Law
- James 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23685189Mon, 09 Mar 2020 13:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyFor the past 50 years, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) has required that the federal government assess the potential environmental impact of any major development projects involving the federal government. Proponents of NEPA argue that...
Proponents of NEPA argue that changes to the NEPA review process would threaten sensitive wildlife habitats and roll back protections against climate change. Others argue, however, that the current NEPA process unnecessarily delays critical infrastructure projects, such as the building of highways, roads, pipelines, and telecommunications networks, without any material benefit in return.

In this episode, Professors David Adelman and James Coleman will discuss the recently proposed changes to the NEPA process and examine the potential effects.

Featuring:
- David Adelman, Harry Reasoner Regents Chair in Law, The University of Texas at Austin School of Law
- James 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.]]>3053administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-92-the-constitutionali
Now the federal government is suing California. The lawsuit alleges that this agreement violates the Constitution, which says states can’t make international treaties or enter into compacts with foreign powers without the consent of Congress. And it also alleges that California’s agreement discriminates against foreign commerce and interferes with the federal government’s exclusive authority over foreign affairs.

The lawsuit raises important issues about federal and state power that are as old as America but have rarely been tested in Court. Listen to expert law professors talk about how the Courts might look at these provocative and urgent questions and the challenge of climate regulation.

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

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23476249Wed, 04 Mar 2020 14:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe state of California and the Canadian province of Quebec have agreed to link their cap-and-trade systems for carbon emissions – these systems require polluters to pay for a permit when they emit greenhouse gases. Now the federal government is...
Now the federal government is suing California. The lawsuit alleges that this agreement violates the Constitution, which says states can’t make international treaties or enter into compacts with foreign powers without the consent of Congress. And it also alleges that California’s agreement discriminates against foreign commerce and interferes with the federal government’s exclusive authority over foreign affairs.

The lawsuit raises important issues about federal and state power that are as old as America but have rarely been tested in Court. Listen to expert law professors talk about how the Courts might look at these provocative and urgent questions and the challenge of climate regulation.

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

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3425administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,federalism & separation of pow,international law & trade,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/forthcoming-education-department-rules-g
Spurred by judicial decisions and other evidence showing that innocent young men have been railroaded out of college with life-changing, often ruinous consequences, OCR issued its more than 30,000 words of proposed rules and comments in November 2018. The proposals would require numerous procedural safeguards, narrow the definition of sexual harassment, and limit university liability for off-campus events. Dozens of advocacy groups and universities, as well as tens of thousands of individuals, filed more than 120,000 formal comments over the next two months.

The vast majority were denunciations of the proposed rules by feminist and victims' rights groups, Democratic legislators and state attorneys general, and universities. The schools have financial and other incentives, including fear of campus activists’ wrath, to oppose more than minimal procedural protections for accused students. They argue that OCR’s proposals – especially those requiring live hearings with cross-examination – would be so traumatic for accusers that most would choose not to report sexual misconduct.

But civil liberties advocates, some law professors at Harvard and elsewhere – including a few prominent feminists -- and families of accused students filed strong responses. They argue that the universities’ pattern of presuming guilt and ignoring evidence of innocence is so entrenched that only federal action could bring a modicum of fairness. These commenters cite over 160 federal and state judicial decisions in recent years finding campus rules and bureaucrats alike biased against accused students.

Whatever the final rules may say, they are sure to be challenged both in court and in Congress as inconsistent with Title IX, the Constitution, or both.

Featuring:
- KC Johnson, Professor of History, Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center
- Stuart Taylor, Freelance Journalist and Author
- [Moderator] Linda Chavez, Chairman, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23432859Tue, 03 Mar 2020 12:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is expected to issue in the coming weeks its long-awaited new rules for colleges and other educational institutions to follow in handling allegations of campus sexual harassment and assault. A...
Spurred by judicial decisions and other evidence showing that innocent young men have been railroaded out of college with life-changing, often ruinous consequences, OCR issued its more than 30,000 words of proposed rules and comments in November 2018. The proposals would require numerous procedural safeguards, narrow the definition of sexual harassment, and limit university liability for off-campus events. Dozens of advocacy groups and universities, as well as tens of thousands of individuals, filed more than 120,000 formal comments over the next two months.

The vast majority were denunciations of the proposed rules by feminist and victims' rights groups, Democratic legislators and state attorneys general, and universities. The schools have financial and other incentives, including fear of campus activists’ wrath, to oppose more than minimal procedural protections for accused students. They argue that OCR’s proposals – especially those requiring live hearings with cross-examination – would be so traumatic for accusers that most would choose not to report sexual misconduct.

But civil liberties advocates, some law professors at Harvard and elsewhere – including a few prominent feminists -- and families of accused students filed strong responses. They argue that the universities’ pattern of presuming guilt and ignoring evidence of innocence is so entrenched that only federal action could bring a modicum of fairness. These commenters cite over 160 federal and state judicial decisions in recent years finding campus rules and bureaucrats alike biased against accused students.

Whatever the final rules may say, they are sure to be challenged both in court and in Congress as inconsistent with Title IX, the Constitution, or both.

Featuring:
- KC Johnson, Professor of History, Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center
- Stuart Taylor, Freelance Journalist and Author
- [Moderator] Linda Chavez, Chairman, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3294administrative law & regulatio,civil rights,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-90-the-new-definition-
Featuring:
- Daren Bakst, Senior Research Fellow in Agricultural Policy, The Heritage Foundation
- Tony Francois, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- John Paul Woodley, Principal, Advantus Strategies, LLC

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23148429Mon, 24 Feb 2020 21:17:17 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Trump Administration recently released its final rule defining “waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act. This rule, called the “Navigable Waters Protection Rule” is the replacement for the repealed 2015 Clean Water Rule. For...
Featuring:
- Daren Bakst, Senior Research Fellow in Agricultural Policy, The Heritage Foundation
- Tony Francois, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- John Paul Woodley, Principal, Advantus Strategies, LLC

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3225administrative law & regulatio,environmental law & property r,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/the-new-doj-uspto-nist-policy-statement-
The 2019 policy statement is a significant development in the ongoing policy and legal disputes over the scope of patent rights on standardized technologies used throughout the world in smartphones, computers, and even coffee machines and automobiles. This teleforum will discuss what the 2019 policy statement means for innovators of groundbreaking, foundational technologies, for implementers of these technologies in products, and for consumers.

Featuring:
- David Jones, Executive Director, High Tech Inventors Alliance
- Kristen Osenga, Professor of Law, University of Richmond School of Law
- Brad Watts, Majority Chief Counsel and Staff Director, United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Intellectual Property
- [Moderator] Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/23044822Fri, 21 Feb 2020 13:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn December 2019, the Department of Justice, the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, and the National Institute of Standards issued a joint policy statement on the legal remedies that should be available for infringement of a valid patent on standardized...
The 2019 policy statement is a significant development in the ongoing policy and legal disputes over the scope of patent rights on standardized technologies used throughout the world in smartphones, computers, and even coffee machines and automobiles. This teleforum will discuss what the 2019 policy statement means for innovators of groundbreaking, foundational technologies, for implementers of these technologies in products, and for consumers.

Featuring:
- David Jones, Executive Director, High Tech Inventors Alliance
- Kristen Osenga, Professor of Law, University of Richmond School of Law
- Brad Watts, Majority Chief Counsel and Staff Director, United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Intellectual Property
- [Moderator] Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3179administrative law & regulatio,intellectual property,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-87-the-whys-and-hows-o
Featuring:
- Susan Dudley, Director, GW Regulatory Studies Center and Distinguished Professor of Practice, Trachtenberg School of Public Policy & Public Administration, George Washington University
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center
- Brian F. Mannix, Research Professor, Regulatory Studies Center, George Washington University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22958571Wed, 19 Feb 2020 11:17:37 +0000The Federalist SocietyPublic notice and comment on rulemaking is a core requirement of the Administrative Procedure Act, and creates the administrative record on which any subsequent judicial review will be based. Yet many people (even people who take the trouble to vote)...
Featuring:
- Susan Dudley, Director, GW Regulatory Studies Center and Distinguished Professor of Practice, Trachtenberg School of Public Policy & Public Administration, George Washington University
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center
- Brian F. Mannix, Research Professor, Regulatory Studies Center, George Washington University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2469administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-11-gdpr-compliance-and
Featuring
- Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, The Committee for Justice
- Neil Chilson, Senior Research Fellow for Technology and Innovation at the Charles Koch Institute

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

Related links:
Explainer Episode 9 – Biometric Information Privacy Act https://regproject.org/explainer-ep-9/

Explainer Episode 6 – Regulating Biometric Access Technologies https://regproject.org/explainer-ep-6/]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22918591Tue, 18 Feb 2020 11:48:34 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Ashley Baker and Neil Chilson discuss the implications for data security under recently-enacted privacy laws. Although data privacy regulations may shield your data from companies that seek to use it for commercial purposes, certain...
Featuring
- Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, The Committee for Justice
- Neil Chilson, Senior Research Fellow for Technology and Innovation at the Charles Koch Institute

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

Related links:
Explainer Episode 9 – Biometric Information Privacy Act https://regproject.org/explainer-ep-9/

Explainer Episode 6 – Regulating Biometric Access Technologies https://regproject.org/explainer-ep-6/]]>2748administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/the-dubious-morality-of-modern-administr_1
Featuring:
- Richard Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law
- Daniel Farber, Sho Sato Professor of Law, Co-Director, Center for Law, Energy &, California-Berkeley Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22668008Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:43:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThis podcast features audio from a recent event held at the University of California, Berkeley, featuring the insights of Richard Epstein and Daniel Farber. Epstein and Farber go to the philosophical roots of administrative law in order to get to the...
Featuring:
- Richard Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law
- Daniel Farber, Sho Sato Professor of Law, Co-Director, Center for Law, Energy &, California-Berkeley Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>4029administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-86-amazons-case-agains
Dan Kelly, Alexander Major and Franklin Turner, nationally recognized commentators and practitioners in the federal bid protest arena, unpack what we know about Amazon’s case, and discuss the possible grounds, laws and regulations governing mandates for competitive contracting by federal agencies.

Featuring:
- Alexander Major, Partner and Co-Leader of Government Contracts & Export Controls Practice Group, McCarter & English LLP
- Franklin Turner, Partner and Co-Leader of Government Contracts & Export Controls Practice Group, McCarter & English LLP
- Moderator: Daniel Kelly, Partner, Government Contracts & Export Controls Practice Group, McCarter & English LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22165559Tue, 28 Jan 2020 13:15:34 +0000The Federalist SocietyAmazon Web Services, Inc. (Amazon) has claimed in a lawsuit in the United States Court of Federal Claims that unlawful intervention by President Donald Trump deprived it of a $10 billion decade-long contract with the Department of Defense (DoD) for a...
Dan Kelly, Alexander Major and Franklin Turner, nationally recognized commentators and practitioners in the federal bid protest arena, unpack what we know about Amazon’s case, and discuss the possible grounds, laws and regulations governing mandates for competitive contracting by federal agencies.

Featuring:
- Alexander Major, Partner and Co-Leader of Government Contracts & Export Controls Practice Group, McCarter & English LLP
- Franklin Turner, Partner and Co-Leader of Government Contracts & Export Controls Practice Group, McCarter & English LLP
- Moderator: Daniel Kelly, Partner, Government Contracts & Export Controls Practice Group, McCarter & English LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3031administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/state-regulators-and-the-gig-economy
Despite this, gig companies have drawn fire from many quarters, including academics, labor unions, and most importantly state legislators. Some state legislators have proposed new regulations that, while potentially improving gig workers’ compensation and benefits, could threaten the very business models that allow for this independent work in the first place. Indeed, some states, most notably California, have even proposed converting all gig workers into traditional employees.

Alex MacDonald discusses their implications for the future of gig work and, perhaps, a better way forward.

Featuring:
- Alexander MacDonald, Littler Mendelson PC

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/22029708Fri, 24 Jan 2020 12:00:32 +0000The Federalist SocietyGig-economy companies like Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, and others have disrupted sectors across the economy. They’ve done so in part by using new technology to tap a large pool of independent workers. This approach has not only proven to be a winning...
Despite this, gig companies have drawn fire from many quarters, including academics, labor unions, and most importantly state legislators. Some state legislators have proposed new regulations that, while potentially improving gig workers’ compensation and benefits, could threaten the very business models that allow for this independent work in the first place. Indeed, some states, most notably California, have even proposed converting all gig workers into traditional employees.

Alex MacDonald discusses their implications for the future of gig work and, perhaps, a better way forward.

Featuring:
- Alexander MacDonald, Littler Mendelson PC

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2574administrative law & regulatio,labor & employment law,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-episode-7-driverless-cars-a_1
Featuring:
- Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- Caleb Watney, Fellow, Technology and Innovation, R Street Institute

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21918612Tue, 21 Jan 2020 15:28:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Adam Thierer and Caleb Watney discuss the emerging questions surrounding the progress of driverless car technology and its regulation. Featuring: - Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University -...
Featuring:
- Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- Caleb Watney, Fellow, Technology and Innovation, R Street Institute

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2058administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-episode-6-constitutional-co
Featuring:
- Ian Adams, Vice President of Policy, TechFreedom
- Jennifer Huddleston, Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/21545336Fri, 10 Jan 2020 09:40:03 +0000The Federalist SocietyDo recent state privacy rules, like California's CCPA, impinge on free speech, violate the dormant commerce clause, or are they preempted by other federal laws? Ian Adams and Jennifer Huddleston discuss. Featuring: - Ian Adams, Vice President of...
Featuring:
- Ian Adams, Vice President of Policy, TechFreedom
- Jennifer Huddleston, Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1672administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-10-did-harvard-admissiFeaturing:

Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20924836Fri, 20 Dec 2019 18:04:27 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Harvard, it is alleged that Harvard admissions discriminated against Asian applicants. In this episode, Pacific Legal Foundation attorney Wen Fa discusses the case, the legal context in which the case was...Featuring:

Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>800affirmative action,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-84-whats-next-for-fannie-fredd
Featuring:
- Mark Calabria, Director, Federal Housing Finance Agency
- Edward Pinto, Resident Fellow and Director, AEI Housing Center, American Enterprise Institute
- Peter Wallison, Senior Fellow, Arthur F. Burns Fellow in Financial Policy Studies, American Enterprise Institute
- [Moderator] Alex J. Pollock, Principal Deputy Director, Office of Financial Research, U.S. Department of Treasury

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20898352Thu, 19 Dec 2019 16:03:01 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) oversees the administration of both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. What's next for the agency? What are the priorities that the agency should be pursuing? This episode features remarks from FHFA Director Mark...
Featuring:
- Mark Calabria, Director, Federal Housing Finance Agency
- Edward Pinto, Resident Fellow and Director, AEI Housing Center, American Enterprise Institute
- Peter Wallison, Senior Fellow, Arthur F. Burns Fellow in Financial Policy Studies, American Enterprise Institute
- [Moderator] Alex J. Pollock, Principal Deputy Director, Office of Financial Research, U.S. Department of Treasury

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>5564cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-episode-5-section-230
Featuring:
- Diane Katz, Senior Research Fellow in Regulatory Policy, The Heritage Foundation
- Jeff Kosseff, Assistant Professor of Cybersecurity Law, United States Naval Academy
- [Moderator] Ashkhen Kazaryan, Director of Civil Liberties, TechFreedom

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20828795Tue, 17 Dec 2019 12:15:02 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, experts discuss Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects platforms from liability for the content produced by users. Some legislators have recently floated the idea of enforcing 'platform neutrality' in a way...
Featuring:
- Diane Katz, Senior Research Fellow in Regulatory Policy, The Heritage Foundation
- Jeff Kosseff, Assistant Professor of Cybersecurity Law, United States Naval Academy
- [Moderator] Ashkhen Kazaryan, Director of Civil Liberties, TechFreedom

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2032administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-9-biometric-informatio
Featuring:
- Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice
- Jennifer Huddleston, Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20692057Thu, 12 Dec 2019 14:05:34 +0000The Federalist SocietyThis episode explores the implications of private rights of action under laws like Illinois' Biometric Information Privacy Act. Are the parameters around these private rights of action too vague and susceptible to abuse? Experts discuss this question...
Featuring:
- Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice
- Jennifer Huddleston, Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1205administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-8-the-community-reinve
Featuring:
- Aaron Klein, Fellow in Economic Studies and Policy Director, Center on Regulation and Markets, Brookings Institution
- Diego Zuluaga, Policy Analyst, Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives, Cato Institute

Additional Resources:

- "The Community Reinvestment Act in the Age of Fintech and Bank Competition" (https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/community-reinvestment-act-age-fintech-bank-competition)
- "Bank-like credit unions should follow bank rules" (https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/bank-like-credit-unions-should-follow-bank-rules/)
- "A tool meant to help minorities buy homes is instead speeding up gentrification in D.C." (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/local-opinions/a-tool-that-helps-minorities-buy-homes-is-speeding-up-gentrification-in-the-district/2019/08/09/10c08366-a744-11e9-9214-246e594de5d5_story.html)

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20512474Thu, 05 Dec 2019 11:50:58 +0000The Federalist SocietyPassed in 1977, the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) was intended to encourage banks and other financial institutions to lend to lower-income individuals in their communities. Has the CRA succeeded in this goal or is there room for improvement? Aaron...
Featuring:
- Aaron Klein, Fellow in Economic Studies and Policy Director, Center on Regulation and Markets, Brookings Institution
- Diego Zuluaga, Policy Analyst, Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives, Cato Institute

Additional Resources:

- "The Community Reinvestment Act in the Age of Fintech and Bank Competition" (https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/community-reinvestment-act-age-fintech-bank-competition)
- "Bank-like credit unions should follow bank rules" (https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/bank-like-credit-unions-should-follow-bank-rules/)
- "A tool meant to help minorities buy homes is instead speeding up gentrification in D.C." (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/local-opinions/a-tool-that-helps-minorities-buy-homes-is-speeding-up-gentrification-in-the-district/2019/08/09/10c08366-a744-11e9-9214-246e594de5d5_story.html)

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2133administrative law & regulatio,financial services & e-commerc,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-83-medicare-for-all
Featuring:
- Roger Klein, Faculty Fellow, Center for Law, Science & Innovation at the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University
- Adam Broad, Organizer, Illinois Single Payer Coalition
- [Moderator] Courtney Hughes, Associate Professor, Northern Illinois University’s College of Health and Human Sciences

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20290955Tue, 26 Nov 2019 12:29:03 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Roger Klein and Adam Broad debate the merits of the increasingly prominent "Medicare for All" proposal for healthcare. The discussion is moderated by Courtney Hughes. Featuring: - Roger Klein, Faculty Fellow, Center for Law, Science...
Featuring:
- Roger Klein, Faculty Fellow, Center for Law, Science & Innovation at the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University
- Adam Broad, Organizer, Illinois Single Payer Coalition
- [Moderator] Courtney Hughes, Associate Professor, Northern Illinois University’s College of Health and Human Sciences

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2722administrative law & regulatio,healthcare,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-7-carpenter-v-unite-stFeaturing:

Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice
Jennifer Huddleston, Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20100189Mon, 18 Nov 2019 18:13:31 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Ashley Baker and Jennifer Huddleston discuss the implications of the famous privacy case, in which the Supreme Court decided that the warrant-less seizure of the plaintiff's cell phone records violated his Fourth Amendment rights....Featuring:

Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice
Jennifer Huddleston, Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1412administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,security & privacy,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-5-regulating-biometric
Featuring:
- Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice
- Jennifer Huddleston, Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/20010034Wed, 13 Nov 2019 10:34:07 +0000The Federalist SocietyWith emerging debates around facial recognition technology, the issue of regulating biometric access technologies has become more prominent. San Francisco, notably, has banned government use of facial recognition, and states like Illinois and Texas...
Featuring:
- Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice
- Jennifer Huddleston, Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1197administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-82-a-preview-of-countyFeaturing:

Brianne Gorod, Chief Counsel, Constitutional Accountability Center
Glenn E. Roper, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
[Moderator] Prof. Donald Kochan, Parker S. Kennedy Professor in Law, Chapman University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19998312Tue, 12 Nov 2019 15:29:22 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe oral argument for County of Maui, Hawaii v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund was heard before the Supreme Court on November 6, 2019. The issue at hand is: "Whether the Clean Water Act requires a permit when pollutants originate from a point source but are...Featuring:

Brianne Gorod, Chief Counsel, Constitutional Accountability Center
Glenn E. Roper, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
[Moderator] Prof. Donald Kochan, Parker S. Kennedy Professor in Law, Chapman University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3174administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,environmental law & property r,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-81-vertical-integratio
Vertical integration – the common ownership or control of both programming and distribution undertakings – has been hailed as a useful strategy for legacy broadcasters to survive in the new digital environment. Regulators and the courts, to a large extent, have endorsed this rationale. Earlier this year, AT&T fended off an antitrust challenge to its merger with Time Warner, successfully claiming that the merger was necessary to take on platforms such as Netflix, Facebook and Google.

Has vertical integration succeeded in making the broadcasting sector more innovative and competitive? Are additional regulatory safeguards necessary to prevent and sanction anti-competitive conduct? What can the United States learn from Canada, a broadcasting market with higher levels of vertical integration and cross-media ownership?

Featuring:
- Brad Danks, Chief Executive Officer, OUTtve Lee,
- Will Rinehart, Director of Technology and Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
- [Moderator] Paul Beaudry, Director of Broadband Policy and Regulatory Affairs, TELUS Communications Inc.

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19931019Fri, 08 Nov 2019 12:52:04 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe broadcasting market used to be straightforward. It functioned on a linear model consisting of content companies, distribution channels and audiences. The advent of the internet disrupted that model, placing new competitive pressures on traditional...
Vertical integration – the common ownership or control of both programming and distribution undertakings – has been hailed as a useful strategy for legacy broadcasters to survive in the new digital environment. Regulators and the courts, to a large extent, have endorsed this rationale. Earlier this year, AT&T fended off an antitrust challenge to its merger with Time Warner, successfully claiming that the merger was necessary to take on platforms such as Netflix, Facebook and Google.

Has vertical integration succeeded in making the broadcasting sector more innovative and competitive? Are additional regulatory safeguards necessary to prevent and sanction anti-competitive conduct? What can the United States learn from Canada, a broadcasting market with higher levels of vertical integration and cross-media ownership?

Featuring:
- Brad Danks, Chief Executive Officer, OUTtve Lee,
- Will Rinehart, Director of Technology and Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
- [Moderator] Paul Beaudry, Director of Broadband Policy and Regulatory Affairs, TELUS Communications Inc.

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3460administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-episode-4-the-future-of-dro
Additional Resources:

Senator Lee's proposed Drone Integration and Zoning Act: https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2019/10/sen-lee-introduces-drone-integration-and-zoning-act

Brent Skorup, "To Kickstart Drone Deliveries, Give Cities and States Regulatory Flexibility": https://www.mercatus.org/bridge/commentary/kickstart-drone-deliveries-give-cities-and-states-regulatory-flexibility

Featuring:
- Mike Lee, United States Senator, Utah
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19873588Tue, 05 Nov 2019 14:21:41 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Adam Thierer and Brent Skorup speak with Senator Mike Lee on the current state of drone regulation. The senator speaks to his proposal for a cooperative, federal solution to regulatory holdup in drone technology innovation....
Additional Resources:

Senator Lee's proposed Drone Integration and Zoning Act: https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2019/10/sen-lee-introduces-drone-integration-and-zoning-act

Brent Skorup, "To Kickstart Drone Deliveries, Give Cities and States Regulatory Flexibility": https://www.mercatus.org/bridge/commentary/kickstart-drone-deliveries-give-cities-and-states-regulatory-flexibility

Featuring:
- Mike Lee, United States Senator, Utah
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1763cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-79-gundy-v-united-statesFeaturing:

Devin Watkins, Attorney, Competitive Enterprise Institute
Moderator: Prof. Christopher J. Walker, Professor of Law, The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19790075Thu, 31 Oct 2019 17:13:22 +0000The Federalist SocietyLast term in Gundy v. U.S., without Justice Kavanaugh the Court was split between a restoration of a substantial limitation on the administrative state and the status quo. In this case, as Justice Gorsuch described it, Congress gave “the...Featuring:

Devin Watkins, Attorney, Competitive Enterprise Institute
Moderator: Prof. Christopher J. Walker, Professor of Law, The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2411administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,supreme courtcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/new-executive-orders-directing-agency-guhttps://api.spreaker.com/episode/19908268Thu, 31 Oct 2019 15:00:16 +0000The Federalist Society3057administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-78-ftc-s-21st-century-
Featuring:
- Maureen Ohlhausen, Partner, Baker Botts LLP and former FTC Acting Chairman
- Duane Pozza, Partner, Wiley Rein LLP
- Moderator: Svetlana Gans, Vice President and Associate General Counsel, NCTA — The Internet & Television Association

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19734636Mon, 28 Oct 2019 17:01:59 +0000The Federalist SocietyWith the conclusion of the Federal Trade Commission’s 21st Century Hearings, the agency is finalizing several reports concerning the state of competition in the US, vertical mergers, the consumer welfare standard, and privacy. This panel summarizes...
Featuring:
- Maureen Ohlhausen, Partner, Baker Botts LLP and former FTC Acting Chairman
- Duane Pozza, Partner, Wiley Rein LLP
- Moderator: Svetlana Gans, Vice President and Associate General Counsel, NCTA — The Internet & Television Association

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3067administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrust,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-epsisode-77-book-review-the-ca
Featuring:
- Prof. Paul H. Rubin, Samuel Candler Dobbs Professor of Economics Emeritus, Emory University
- Moderator: Prof. 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.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19672363Thu, 24 Oct 2019 13:41:31 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Paul Rubin, the world’s leading expert on cooperative capitalism, discusses his new book, The Capitalism Paradox: How Cooperation Enables Free Market Competition. Rubin explains how we should think about markets, economics, and...
Featuring:
- Prof. Paul H. Rubin, Samuel Candler Dobbs Professor of Economics Emeritus, Emory University
- Moderator: Prof. 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.]]>2678administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/state-sponsored-piracy-the-allen-v-coopeIn this case, North Carolina argues that it is immune from any copyright infringement lawsuits given its state sovereign immunity under the 11th Amendment. Rick Allen maintains in his lawsuit that North Carolina is liable for its unauthorized use of his video footage and photographs of the Queen Ann’s Revenge given that Congress validly abrogated the state’s sovereign immunity in the Copyright Remedy Clarification Act (CRCA). In Allen v. Cooper, the Supreme Court will determine whether the CRCA was a valid statutory abrogation of North Carolina’s state sovereign immunity. In this teleforum, experts on varying sides of the issue will discuss the case and its impact on state officials and the use of copyrighted materials by state agencies and other institutions.
Featuring:

Michael Bynum, Editor, Epic Sports
Terry Hart, VP, Legal Policy and Copyright Counsel, Copyright Alliance
Matthew R. McGuire, Counsel, Hunton Andrews Kurth

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19653144Wed, 23 Oct 2019 17:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyWhat happens when a state agency uses without authorization copyrighted videos and pictures of Blackbeard’s famous pirate ship, the Queen Ann’s Revenge? Is this an act of state-sanctioned piracy for which the copyright owner can sue for...In this case, North Carolina argues that it is immune from any copyright infringement lawsuits given its state sovereign immunity under the 11th Amendment. Rick Allen maintains in his lawsuit that North Carolina is liable for its unauthorized use of his video footage and photographs of the Queen Ann’s Revenge given that Congress validly abrogated the state’s sovereign immunity in the Copyright Remedy Clarification Act (CRCA). In Allen v. Cooper, the Supreme Court will determine whether the CRCA was a valid statutory abrogation of North Carolina’s state sovereign immunity. In this teleforum, experts on varying sides of the issue will discuss the case and its impact on state officials and the use of copyrighted materials by state agencies and other institutions.
Featuring:

Michael Bynum, Editor, Epic Sports
Terry Hart, VP, Legal Policy and Copyright Counsel, Copyright Alliance
Matthew R. McGuire, Counsel, Hunton Andrews Kurth

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3516administrative law & regulatio,intellectual property,litigation,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/spectrum-wars_1
Featuring:
- Dean Brenner, Senior Vice President, Spectrum Strategy & Technology Policy at Qualcomm
- Hilary Cain, Director (Group Manager), Technology and Innovation Policy, Toyota North America
- Danielle Piñeres, Vice President & Associate General Counsel, NCTA- The Internet & Television Association
- [Moderator] Prof. Christopher J. Walker, Professor of Law, The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19633639Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:49:20 +0000The Federalist SocietyWith the advent of mobile devices, ubiquitous home laptop, tablet and iPad computers, content streaming and more, the need for wireless service is forever on the rise in the United States. Industry experts note that capacity limits are being...
Featuring:
- Dean Brenner, Senior Vice President, Spectrum Strategy & Technology Policy at Qualcomm
- Hilary Cain, Director (Group Manager), Technology and Innovation Policy, Toyota North America
- Danielle Piñeres, Vice President & Associate General Counsel, NCTA- The Internet & Television Association
- [Moderator] Prof. Christopher J. Walker, Professor of Law, The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3243administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/a-discussion-on-current-department-of-la
This episode, moderated by former Solicitor of Labor Gregory Jacob, features a discussion with Cheryl Stanton, head of DOL’s Wage and Hour Division, and Jonathan Berry, head of its regulatory policy shop, about how President Trump’s Department of Labor is stewarding the responsibilities that have been entrusted to its care.

Featuring:
- Jonathan Berry, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, U.S. Department of Labor
- Cheryl M. Stanton, Administrator, Wage and Hour Division, U.S. Department of Labor
- [Moderator] Gregory Jacob, Partner, O'Melveny & Myers LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19556815Thu, 17 Oct 2019 17:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Department of Labor administers and enforces more than 180 federal laws, with mandates and regulations that affect workplace activities for about 10 million employers and 125 million workers. Since its creation in 1913, DOL has been in the...
This episode, moderated by former Solicitor of Labor Gregory Jacob, features a discussion with Cheryl Stanton, head of DOL’s Wage and Hour Division, and Jonathan Berry, head of its regulatory policy shop, about how President Trump’s Department of Labor is stewarding the responsibilities that have been entrusted to its care.

Featuring:
- Jonathan Berry, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, U.S. Department of Labor
- Cheryl M. Stanton, Administrator, Wage and Hour Division, U.S. Department of Labor
- [Moderator] Gregory Jacob, Partner, O'Melveny & Myers LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3436administrative law & regulatio,labor & employment law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-73-balancing-federal-a_1
Featuring:
- Gordon A. Coffee, Partner, Winston & Strawn LLP
- Prof. Ari Peskoe, Lecturer on Law, Harvard Law School

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19553583Tue, 15 Oct 2019 17:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn statutes such as the Federal Power Act and Clean Water Act, Congress divided responsibility for oversight of energy generation and transmission projects between federal agencies and the States. In recent years, several States have more...
Featuring:
- Gordon A. Coffee, Partner, Winston & Strawn LLP
- Prof. Ari Peskoe, Lecturer on Law, Harvard Law School

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2607administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,federalism,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-71-the-net-neutrality-saga-moz
In this episode, a panel of legal and economic experts share their views of the court’s reasoning and of the implications of this case upon the on-going net neutrality debate.

Featuring:
- Russell P. Hanser, Partner, Wilkinson Barker Knauer, LLP
- Prof. Daniel Lyons, Professor of Law, Boston College Law School
- Dr. George S. Ford, Chief Economist, Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Public Policy
Studies
- Moderator: Lawrence J. Spiwak, President, Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Public
Policy Studies

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19440089Thu, 10 Oct 2019 11:01:40 +0000The Federalist SocietyEarlier in October, the D.C. Circuit issued its long-awaited opinion in Mozilla v. Federal Communications Commission in which the court largely upheld the Commission’s 2017 Restoring Internet Freedom Order that reversed the Obama Administration’s 2015...
In this episode, a panel of legal and economic experts share their views of the court’s reasoning and of the implications of this case upon the on-going net neutrality debate.

Featuring:
- Russell P. Hanser, Partner, Wilkinson Barker Knauer, LLP
- Prof. Daniel Lyons, Professor of Law, Boston College Law School
- Dr. George S. Ford, Chief Economist, Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Public Policy
Studies
- Moderator: Lawrence J. Spiwak, President, Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Public
Policy Studies

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2927administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrust,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-3-the-download-on-californi
Featuring:
- Ian Adams, Vice President of Policy, TechFreedom
- Joseph Jerome, Policy Counsel, Privacy & Data, Center for Democracy & Technology
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19412521Tue, 08 Oct 2019 15:45:23 +0000The Federalist SocietyThis podcast features a fascinating back-and-forth on the implications of new amendments to California's privacy law, CCPA (California Consumer Privacy Act). Is California setting the law of the land? How will the FTC respond? What will this mean for...
Featuring:
- Ian Adams, Vice President of Policy, TechFreedom
- Joseph Jerome, Policy Counsel, Privacy & Data, Center for Democracy & Technology
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2254cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-71-accounting-for-race_1
Featuring:
- Todd Gaziano, Chief of Legal Policy and Strategic Research and Director, Center for the Separation of Powers, Pacific Legal Foundation
- Althea Nagai, Research Fellow, Center for Equal Opportunity
- Theodore M. Shaw, Julius L. Chambers Distinguished Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Civil Rights, University of North Carolina School of Law
- Hans A. von Spakovsky, Senior Legal Fellow, The Heritage Foundation
- Moderator: Linda Chavez, Chairman, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19389301Mon, 07 Oct 2019 15:47:10 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn September 10, 2019, The Federalist Society hosted a luncheon cosponsored with the Center for Equal Opportunity (CEO). CEO released and presented a new study and report entitled “Race and Ethnicity in Undergraduate Admissions at Five Virginia...
Featuring:
- Todd Gaziano, Chief of Legal Policy and Strategic Research and Director, Center for the Separation of Powers, Pacific Legal Foundation
- Althea Nagai, Research Fellow, Center for Equal Opportunity
- Theodore M. Shaw, Julius L. Chambers Distinguished Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Civil Rights, University of North Carolina School of Law
- Hans A. von Spakovsky, Senior Legal Fellow, The Heritage Foundation
- Moderator: Linda Chavez, Chairman, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>5736administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-70-independent-contrac
In this episode, Bruce J. Sarchet gives an overview of the ABC Test; an analysis of the provisions of California’s AB 5; a discussion of the potential impacts on the California and U.S. economy should the bill be passed into law; and options for compliance.

Featuring:
- Bruce J. Sarchet, Shareholder, Littler Mendelson P.C.

Visit our website – ww.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19357894Fri, 04 Oct 2019 15:45:54 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe status of independent contractors in California has been hotly debated over the past year, with the landmark California Supreme Court decision in Dynamex and with the resulting debate over California’s Assembly Bill 5. The ABC test, if ultimately...
In this episode, Bruce J. Sarchet gives an overview of the ABC Test; an analysis of the provisions of California’s AB 5; a discussion of the potential impacts on the California and U.S. economy should the bill be passed into law; and options for compliance.

Featuring:
- Bruce J. Sarchet, Shareholder, Littler Mendelson P.C.

Visit our website – ww.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1952administrative law & regulatio,labor & employment law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-5-arizonas-licensing-r
Featuring:
- Jon Riches, Director of National Litigation, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19325320Wed, 02 Oct 2019 10:11:27 +0000The Federalist SocietyWhat are the costs and benefits of occupational licensing? Why do many believe that the laws around licensing ought to be reformed, and what has Arizona been doing to address these concerns? Jon Riches of the Goldwater Institute gives an overview of...
Featuring:
- Jon Riches, Director of National Litigation, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1231administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/sox-auditor-attestation-requirements-str
Public companies in the United States are subject to requirements (i) to establish and maintain internal control over financial reporting and (ii) to have their external auditors attest to, and report on, management’s assessment of these internal controls. These requirements, which some have criticized as imposing excessive costs on smaller public companies, were introduced in part as a reaction to corporate scandals. The Securities and Exchange Commission recently proposed amendments to the existing regulations that would, if adopted, lighten the regulatory burdens for smaller reporting issuers. Some proponents of the amendments argue that exempting smaller issuers from some requirement is critical to promoting their capital formation activities; some opponents contend that the proposed amendments could jeopardize the investor-protection elements of the capital markets.

Featuring:
- John Berlau, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute
- Wes Bricker, US & Mexico Assurance Leader and Vice Chair, PwC
- Prof. J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School
- [Moderator] C. Wallace DeWitt, Senior Counsel, Allen & Overy LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19298053Wed, 25 Sep 2019 12:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIs “investor protection” coordinated sufficiently with “promotion of capital formation”? This teleforum will consider this question in connection with recent public rulemaking developments at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Public companies...
Public companies in the United States are subject to requirements (i) to establish and maintain internal control over financial reporting and (ii) to have their external auditors attest to, and report on, management’s assessment of these internal controls. These requirements, which some have criticized as imposing excessive costs on smaller public companies, were introduced in part as a reaction to corporate scandals. The Securities and Exchange Commission recently proposed amendments to the existing regulations that would, if adopted, lighten the regulatory burdens for smaller reporting issuers. Some proponents of the amendments argue that exempting smaller issuers from some requirement is critical to promoting their capital formation activities; some opponents contend that the proposed amendments could jeopardize the investor-protection elements of the capital markets.

Featuring:
- John Berlau, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute
- Wes Bricker, US & Mexico Assurance Leader and Vice Chair, PwC
- Prof. J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School
- [Moderator] C. Wallace DeWitt, Senior Counsel, Allen & Overy LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3246administrative law & regulatio,corporations,financial services & e-commerc,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-68-challenges-in-regul
Featuring:
- Alexander Major, Partner and Co-Leader of Government Contracts & Export Controls Practice Group, McCarter & English LLP
- Franklin Turner, Partner and Co-Leader of Government Contracts & Export Controls Practice Group, McCarter & English LLP
- [Moderator] Daniel Kelly, Partner, Government Contracts & Export Controls Practice Group, McCarter & English LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19172432Fri, 20 Sep 2019 14:16:12 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Alexander Major and Franklin Turner, nationally recognized commentators in this area, will discuss the recent changes to critical requirements promulgated by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the auditing effort...
Featuring:
- Alexander Major, Partner and Co-Leader of Government Contracts & Export Controls Practice Group, McCarter & English LLP
- Franklin Turner, Partner and Co-Leader of Government Contracts & Export Controls Practice Group, McCarter & English LLP
- [Moderator] Daniel Kelly, Partner, Government Contracts & Export Controls Practice Group, McCarter & English LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2991administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-2-the-techlash
In this episode, Adam Thierer moderates a discussion between Geoffrey Manne and Hal Singer on whether these concerns represent genuine consumer harm and whether antitrust law is an appropriate means to address them.

Featuring:
- Geoffrey Manne, President and Founder, International Center for Law & Economics
- Hal Singer, Managing Director, Econ One
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University


Resources discussed in today's episode:
- "Concluding Comments: The Weakness of Interventionist Claims (FTC Hearings, ICLE Comment 11)" (https://laweconcenter.org/resource/icle-comments-ftc-hearings-on-competition-consumer-protection-in-the-21st-century-summary/)
- "The Real Reason Foundem Foundered" (https://laweconcenter.org/resource/the-real-reason-foundem-foundered/)
- "Google and the Limits of Antitrust: The Case Against the Antitrust Case Against Google" (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1577556)
- "How Big Tech Threatens Economic Liberty" (https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-big-tech-threatens-economic-liberty/)
- "Sorry, Mr. Delrahim: Big Tech’s Worst Abuses Can’t Be Cured Without Stiffer Regulation" (https://promarket.org/mr-delrahim-big-tech-worst-abuses-cant-be-cured-without-stiffer-regulation/)

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19117746Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:19:18 +0000The Federalist Society"Techlash" refers to a growing public concern over the behavior of big technology companies and the call for government action to curtail what are seen as abusive practices. Figures on the right and the left alike have expressed concerns of over...
In this episode, Adam Thierer moderates a discussion between Geoffrey Manne and Hal Singer on whether these concerns represent genuine consumer harm and whether antitrust law is an appropriate means to address them.

Featuring:
- Geoffrey Manne, President and Founder, International Center for Law & Economics
- Hal Singer, Managing Director, Econ One
- [Moderator] Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University


Resources discussed in today's episode:
- "Concluding Comments: The Weakness of Interventionist Claims (FTC Hearings, ICLE Comment 11)" (https://laweconcenter.org/resource/icle-comments-ftc-hearings-on-competition-consumer-protection-in-the-21st-century-summary/)
- "The Real Reason Foundem Foundered" (https://laweconcenter.org/resource/the-real-reason-foundem-foundered/)
- "Google and the Limits of Antitrust: The Case Against the Antitrust Case Against Google" (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1577556)
- "How Big Tech Threatens Economic Liberty" (https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-big-tech-threatens-economic-liberty/)
- "Sorry, Mr. Delrahim: Big Tech’s Worst Abuses Can’t Be Cured Without Stiffer Regulation" (https://promarket.org/mr-delrahim-big-tech-worst-abuses-cant-be-cured-without-stiffer-regulation/)

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2176administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-4-offensive-license-plates
Kotler filed a federal suit claiming that the DMV had violated his free speech rights. In this short episode, Wen Fa, an attorney in the case, describes the details.

Featuring:
- Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19080438Thu, 12 Sep 2019 12:55:47 +0000The Federalist SocietyJon Kotler, a California fan of the London soccer club Fulham FC, wanted to put the letters "COYW" on his license plate. The letters stand for a common phrase that Fulham fans use to support their team: "Come on You Whites!" "White" is meant to refer...
Kotler filed a federal suit claiming that the DMV had violated his free speech rights. In this short episode, Wen Fa, an attorney in the case, describes the details.

Featuring:
- Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>819administrative law & regulatio,free speech & election law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/deep-dive-episode-67-the-new-endangered-
Featuring:
- Jonathan Wood, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- [Moderator] Daren Bakst, Senior Research Fellow in Agricultural Policy, The Heritage Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/19015048Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:18:39 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Endangered Species Act has been credited with preventing extinctions but criticized for failing to recover species and imposing unfair burdens on property owners. Recently, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marines Fisheries...
Featuring:
- Jonathan Wood, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- [Moderator] Daren Bakst, Senior Research Fellow in Agricultural Policy, The Heritage Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3001cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-3-epas-new-clean-air-a
Featuring:
- Jeffrey R. Holmstead, Partner, Bracewell LLP
- Megan Herzog, Special Assistant Attorney General, Massachusetts Attorney General's Office

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18999742Wed, 04 Sep 2019 10:35:33 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this episode, Jeff Holmstead and Megan Herzog discuss the recent rule change from the EPA on emissions standards. The Affordable Clean Energy plan replaces the Obama-era Clean Power Plan. The reduction in admissions standards has raised new...
Featuring:
- Jeffrey R. Holmstead, Partner, Bracewell LLP
- Megan Herzog, Special Assistant Attorney General, Massachusetts Attorney General's Office

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1819cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tech-roundup-1-the-brave-new-world-of-de
Join Professor Robert Chesney (co-author of "Deep Fakes: A Looming Challenge for Privacy, Democracy, and National Security"), Matthew Feeney, and Will Rinehart as they explore the implications of this emerging technology.

Featuring:
- Robert M. Chesney, James A. Baker III Chair in the Rule of Law and World Affairs and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, The University of Texas at Austin School of Law
- Matthew Feeney, Director, Project on Emerging Technologies, Cato Institute
- [Moderator] Will Rinehart, Director of Technology and Innovation Policy, American Action Forum

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18952279Thu, 29 Aug 2019 16:42:39 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this inaugural Tech Roundup podcast, experts discuss various questions raised by "deep fake" technology, in which machine learning algorithms are used to create synthetic videos and photos. What are the potential societal and political implications...
Join Professor Robert Chesney (co-author of "Deep Fakes: A Looming Challenge for Privacy, Democracy, and National Security"), Matthew Feeney, and Will Rinehart as they explore the implications of this emerging technology.

Featuring:
- Robert M. Chesney, James A. Baker III Chair in the Rule of Law and World Affairs and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, The University of Texas at Austin School of Law
- Matthew Feeney, Director, Project on Emerging Technologies, Cato Institute
- [Moderator] Will Rinehart, Director of Technology and Innovation Policy, American Action Forum

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1554administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/explainer-episode-2-the-dynamex-decision_1
Featuring:
- Luke Wake, Senior Staff Attorney, NFIB Small Business Legal Center

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18919339Mon, 26 Aug 2019 15:16:24 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn 2018, the California Superior Court announced a new test for determining whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor. In this Explainer podcast episode, Luke Wake of the National Federation of Independent Businesses breaks down the...
Featuring:
- Luke Wake, Senior Staff Attorney, NFIB Small Business Legal Center

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>921labor & employment law,litigation,regulatory transparency projec,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/the-green-new-deal
What is the Green New Deal, what are its aims, and how might it achieve them? Is the proposal realistic? How does it compare to landmark pieces of environmental legislation from the past decades?

These and other questions are explored in this short podcast.

Featuring:
- Ann Carlson, Shirley Shapiro Professor of Environmental Law and Faculty Co-Director of the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, UCLA School of Law
- James Coleman, Associate Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18887091Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:21:49 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn this inaugural episode of the Regulatory Transparency Project's Explainer podcast series, Ann Carlson and James Coleman discuss the merits and implications of the Green New Deal. What is the Green New Deal, what are its aims, and how might it...
What is the Green New Deal, what are its aims, and how might it achieve them? Is the proposal realistic? How does it compare to landmark pieces of environmental legislation from the past decades?

These and other questions are explored in this short podcast.

Featuring:
- Ann Carlson, Shirley Shapiro Professor of Environmental Law and Faculty Co-Director of the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, UCLA School of Law
- James Coleman, Associate Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2190administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy lawcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/americans-with-disabilities-act-litigati_1
Plaintiffs attorneys have been aggressive in enforcing the ADA against all types of physical businesses for years. And now we are seeing a new frontier of litigation - websites. Banks, hotels, service providers, and retailers of all types are beginning to see lawsuits alleging their websites are not accessible to the disabled.

Karen Harned will provide the background on this new trend in ADA litigation, the current state of the law, and highlight a case the Supreme Court is being asked to take this next term on the issue.

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

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18650017Fri, 26 Jul 2019 14:12:31 +0000The Federalist SocietyTitle III of the Americans with Disabilities Act requires public accommodations be accessible to the disabled community. Since its enactment in 1991, it has been understood that any store, restaurant, theater, hotel facility, school, or other building...
Plaintiffs attorneys have been aggressive in enforcing the ADA against all types of physical businesses for years. And now we are seeing a new frontier of litigation - websites. Banks, hotels, service providers, and retailers of all types are beginning to see lawsuits alleging their websites are not accessible to the disabled.

Karen Harned will provide the background on this new trend in ADA litigation, the current state of the law, and highlight a case the Supreme Court is being asked to take this next term on the issue.

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

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1327administrative law & regulatio,labor & employment law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/subdelegations-of-rulemaking-power-and-tOn behalf of nine vaping retailers, Pacific Legal Foundation is challenging the FDA’s "Deeming Rule" issued by a career employee, Leslie Kux. A new research study of HHS rules over a 17-year period, also by PLF, found that nearly two-thirds of HHS regulations were issued by non-Senate-confirmed staff. Within FDA, 98% of its rules (1,860 of them) were issued by civil service employees in career positions like that held by Ms. Kux. In the pending litigation, FDA argues that Ms. Kux was also an inferior officer when she issued rules, and that inferior officers may lawfully issue such binding rules, even if no supervisor may subsequently change them without a new rulemaking process.
The speakers examine a variety of topics related to the subdelegation of rulemaking power, including the creation of offices by department heads and who within those offices can lawfully exercise rulemaking power.
Featuring:

Todd F. Gaziano, Chief of Legal Policy and Strategic Research and Director, Center for the Separation of Powers, Pacific Legal Foundation
Prof. Anne Joseph O'Connell, Adelbert H. Sweet Professor of Law, Stanford Law School
[Moderator] Prof. Kristin E. Hickman, Distinguished McKnight University Professor and Harlan Albert Rogers Professor in Law, University of Minnesota Law School

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18639305Tue, 23 Jul 2019 17:00:57 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe strictures of the Appointments Clause are receiving renewed attention in the courts, including the Supreme Court. A year ago, the High Court ruled that the SEC’s administrative law judges must be appointed in conformity with this clause, and...On behalf of nine vaping retailers, Pacific Legal Foundation is challenging the FDA’s "Deeming Rule" issued by a career employee, Leslie Kux. A new research study of HHS rules over a 17-year period, also by PLF, found that nearly two-thirds of HHS regulations were issued by non-Senate-confirmed staff. Within FDA, 98% of its rules (1,860 of them) were issued by civil service employees in career positions like that held by Ms. Kux. In the pending litigation, FDA argues that Ms. Kux was also an inferior officer when she issued rules, and that inferior officers may lawfully issue such binding rules, even if no supervisor may subsequently change them without a new rulemaking process.
The speakers examine a variety of topics related to the subdelegation of rulemaking power, including the creation of offices by department heads and who within those offices can lawfully exercise rulemaking power.
Featuring:

Todd F. Gaziano, Chief of Legal Policy and Strategic Research and Director, Center for the Separation of Powers, Pacific Legal Foundation
Prof. Anne Joseph O'Connell, Adelbert H. Sweet Professor of Law, Stanford Law School
[Moderator] Prof. Kristin E. Hickman, Distinguished McKnight University Professor and Harlan Albert Rogers Professor in Law, University of Minnesota Law School

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3745administrative law & regulatio,constitution,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/the-federal-reserve-and-real-time-paymen
The Federal Reserve is currently exploring ways to support faster payments in the U.S. The potential actions would facilitate real-time interbank settlement of faster payments. Proponents feel the actions may assist smaller banks and credit unions to service local communities, while detractors raise concerns about interoperability, the ability to exchange messages among different instant-payment systems, and other issues. This live podcast will address these topics and much more.

Featuring:
- Aaron Klein, Fellow in Economic Studies and Policy Director, Center on Regulation and Markets, Brookings Institution
- George Selgin, Senior Fellow and Director, Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives, Cato Institute
- [Moderator] J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18590864Tue, 16 Jul 2019 12:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Federal Reserve plays a central role in the nation’s payment systems. Reserve banks keep currency in circulation to meet demand, provide check collection services to banks, operate payment systems, and provide financial services to the United...
The Federal Reserve is currently exploring ways to support faster payments in the U.S. The potential actions would facilitate real-time interbank settlement of faster payments. Proponents feel the actions may assist smaller banks and credit unions to service local communities, while detractors raise concerns about interoperability, the ability to exchange messages among different instant-payment systems, and other issues. This live podcast will address these topics and much more.

Featuring:
- Aaron Klein, Fellow in Economic Studies and Policy Director, Center on Regulation and Markets, Brookings Institution
- George Selgin, Senior Fellow and Director, Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives, Cato Institute
- [Moderator] J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3867administrative law & regulatio,financial services & e-commerc,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/free-lunch-episode-62-agency-rulemaking-
In his recent article, “Strategic Institutional Positioning: How We Have Come to Generate Environmental Law Without Congress,” published in the Texas A&M Law Review, Donald Kochan lays out the argument that delegation of authority to agencies serves the interests of both sides of Congress. Those ostensibly elected to oppose further regulation can argue that any proposed rule changes are out of their control. Conversely, representatives elected to increase regulation can blame agency heads for not following the intent of the authorizing statute. However, both sides avoid blame by the electorate.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of such a system? Should specialized bureaucrats do the lion’s share of rulemaking? Or should elected Senators and Congressman, often without the same level of expertise, write the rules that govern our nation?

Featuring:
- Andrew Grossman, Partner, Baker & Hostetler LLP and Adjunct Scholar, The Cato Institute
- Prof. Donald Kochan, Professor in Law and the Associate Dean for Research & Faculty Development, Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law
- Prof. Robert Percival, Professor of Law and Director, Environmental Law Program, University of Maryland School of Law
- Brianne Gorod, Chief Counsel, Constitutional Accountability Center
- [Moderator] Jeff Holmstead, Partner, Bracewell LLP

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18515651Wed, 10 Jul 2019 15:42:05 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn June 18, 2019, the Federalist Society's Article I Initiative and Regulatory Transparency Project hosted a panel on "Agency Rulemaking: Unnecessary Delegation or Indispensable Assistance?" at the National Press Club in Washington, DC. In his recent...
In his recent article, “Strategic Institutional Positioning: How We Have Come to Generate Environmental Law Without Congress,” published in the Texas A&M Law Review, Donald Kochan lays out the argument that delegation of authority to agencies serves the interests of both sides of Congress. Those ostensibly elected to oppose further regulation can argue that any proposed rule changes are out of their control. Conversely, representatives elected to increase regulation can blame agency heads for not following the intent of the authorizing statute. However, both sides avoid blame by the electorate.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of such a system? Should specialized bureaucrats do the lion’s share of rulemaking? Or should elected Senators and Congressman, often without the same level of expertise, write the rules that govern our nation?

Featuring:
- Andrew Grossman, Partner, Baker & Hostetler LLP and Adjunct Scholar, The Cato Institute
- Prof. Donald Kochan, Professor in Law and the Associate Dean for Research & Faculty Development, Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law
- Prof. Robert Percival, Professor of Law and Director, Environmental Law Program, University of Maryland School of Law
- Brianne Gorod, Chief Counsel, Constitutional Accountability Center
- [Moderator] Jeff Holmstead, Partner, Bracewell LLP

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>5062administrative law & regulatio,environmental law & property rcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/kisor-v-wilkie
Karen Harned and Stephen Vaden discuss that morning’s highly-fractured decision in Kisor and its potential implications — including for the Chevron deference doctrine that applies to agency interpretations of statutory provisions.

Featuring:
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, NFIB Small Business Legal Center
- Stephen Vaden, General Counsel, United States Department of Agriculture

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18454452Wed, 03 Jul 2019 15:23:39 +0000The Federalist SocietyLast week the Supreme Court decided the much-anticipated Kisor v. Wilkie case. The Court had granted certiorari in Kisor to decide whether to overrule Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., 325 U.S. 410 (1945), and Auer v. Robbins, 519 U.S. 452 (1997)....
Karen Harned and Stephen Vaden discuss that morning’s highly-fractured decision in Kisor and its potential implications — including for the Chevron deference doctrine that applies to agency interpretations of statutory provisions.

Featuring:
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, NFIB Small Business Legal Center
- Stephen Vaden, General Counsel, United States Department of Agriculture

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3519administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,supreme courtcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/gundy-v-united-states-revisiting-the-non_1
Featuring:
- Mark Chenoweth, Executive Director and General Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18390008Fri, 28 Jun 2019 14:30:26 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Gundy v. United States disappointed some observers who were hoping that the Court would use the case to reinvigorate the nondelegation doctrine. Will the 4-1-3 decision here leave the status quo intact or embolden...
Featuring:
- Mark Chenoweth, Executive Director and General Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2145administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,supreme courtcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/juliana-v-united-states
The Juliana plaintiffs – most of whom were minor children when the suit was filed in 2015 – argue, inter alia, that the federal government has violated their fundamental right to a stable climate grounded in the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. The plaintiffs also argue that the government has breached its duty to hold the atmosphere in trust under federal common law principles. The federal government argues that the plaintiffs lack standing; that the case is not justiciable in any federal court under Article III of the U.S. Constitution; that the plaintiffs’ claims were not properly brought pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act; and that the plaintiffs have failed to state a claim on the merits upon which relief can be granted.

Featuring:
- James R. May, Distinguished Professor of Law, Widener University Delaware Law School
- Damien M. Schiff, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- [Moderator] Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law; Director, Coleman P. Burke Center for Environmental Law, Case Western Reserve University School of Law

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18373401Tue, 25 Jun 2019 09:12:55 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn June 4, 2019, a Ninth Circuit panel heard oral argument in a high-profile interlocutory appeal in Juliana v. United States, regarding whether the U.S. Constitution gives rise to cognizable constitutional and federal common law claims against the...
The Juliana plaintiffs – most of whom were minor children when the suit was filed in 2015 – argue, inter alia, that the federal government has violated their fundamental right to a stable climate grounded in the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. The plaintiffs also argue that the government has breached its duty to hold the atmosphere in trust under federal common law principles. The federal government argues that the plaintiffs lack standing; that the case is not justiciable in any federal court under Article III of the U.S. Constitution; that the plaintiffs’ claims were not properly brought pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act; and that the plaintiffs have failed to state a claim on the merits upon which relief can be granted.

Featuring:
- James R. May, Distinguished Professor of Law, Widener University Delaware Law School
- Damien M. Schiff, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- [Moderator] Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law; Director, Coleman P. Burke Center for Environmental Law, Case Western Reserve University School of Law

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3353administrative law & regulatio,constitution,environmental & energy law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/cedar-point-nursery-v-shiroma
In this podcast, hear reactions from Wen Fa and Bethany Berger.

Featuring:
- Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- Prof. Bethany Berger, Wallace Stevens Professor of Law, University of Connecticut School of Law

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18298611Mon, 17 Jun 2019 12:40:41 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn May 8, 2019, the Ninth Circuit issued a 2-1 decision in Cedar Point Nursery v. Shiroma. In Cedar Point, California agricultural growers asked the court to invalidate an Agricultural Labor Relations Board regulation that allowed union organizers to...
In this podcast, hear reactions from Wen Fa and Bethany Berger.

Featuring:
- Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- Prof. Bethany Berger, Wallace Stevens Professor of Law, University of Connecticut School of Law

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2089administrative law & regulatio,labor & employment law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/libor-will-a-200-trillion-global-benchma_1
Dr. Oonagh McDonald thoroughly explores LIBOR's evolution, scandals, and the issues of its future in her new book, "Holding Bankers to Account." Oonagh will present the lessons of history and the state of current debates. Gary Kalbaugh of ING Financial and Columbia Law School and Alex Pollock of the R Street Institute will be discussants.

Featuring:
- Prof. Gary Kalbaugh, Special Professor of Law at the Maurice A. Deane School of Law
- Alex J. Pollock, Distinguished Senior Fellow, R Street Institute
- Dr. Oonagh McDonald, CBE, Philosophy Lecturer at the University of Bristol, Member of the British Parliament 1976-1987, Member of the Front Bench Treasury Team, Author of Several Books, Including her Newest One "Holding Bankers to Account"

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18263599Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:38:20 +0000The Federalist SocietyLIBOR is a hugely important interest rate benchmark, used globally and embedded in over $200 trillion of financial contracts. It has its notable shortcomings, including having been subject to scandalous attempts at manipulation. Financial regulators,...
Dr. Oonagh McDonald thoroughly explores LIBOR's evolution, scandals, and the issues of its future in her new book, "Holding Bankers to Account." Oonagh will present the lessons of history and the state of current debates. Gary Kalbaugh of ING Financial and Columbia Law School and Alex Pollock of the R Street Institute will be discussants.

Featuring:
- Prof. Gary Kalbaugh, Special Professor of Law at the Maurice A. Deane School of Law
- Alex J. Pollock, Distinguished Senior Fellow, R Street Institute
- Dr. Oonagh McDonald, CBE, Philosophy Lecturer at the University of Bristol, Member of the British Parliament 1976-1987, Member of the Front Bench Treasury Team, Author of Several Books, Including her Newest One "Holding Bankers to Account"

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3333administrative law & regulatio,financial services,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/payday-lending-loans_1
Featuring:
- Prof. Todd Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18179987Wed, 05 Jun 2019 10:37:23 +0000The Federalist SocietyOne of the final acts of former Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB) Director Richard Cordray before he left to run for Governor of Ohio in 2017 was the issuance of a comprehensive rule governing payday loans, auto title loans, and other...
Featuring:
- Prof. Todd Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1653administrative law & regulatio,financial services,financial services & e-commerc,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/loan-shark-prevention-act_1
Featuring:
- Wayne Abernathy, Executive VP for Financial Institutions Policy and Regulatory Affairs, American Bankers Association
- Todd Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18135012Fri, 31 May 2019 12:05:28 +0000The Federalist SocietyRecently, members of the United States Senate and United States House of Representatives have introduced the "Loan Shark Prevention Act," which imposes a nationwide 15% interest rate ceiling on all consumer credit products, from credit cards to payday...
Featuring:
- Wayne Abernathy, Executive VP for Financial Institutions Policy and Regulatory Affairs, American Bankers Association
- Todd Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2682administrative law & regulatio,financial servicescleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/regulatory-reform-report-card-agency-gen
Featuring:
- Hon. Steven G. Bradbury, General Counsel, U.S. Department of Transportation
- Mr. George H. Fibbe, Deputy General Counsel, U.S. Department of Energy
- Hon. Hon. Matthew Z. Leopold, General Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
- Hon. Brent J. McIntosh, General Counsel, U.S. Department of the Treasury
- Hon. Stephen A. Vaden, General Counsel, U.S. Department of Agriculture
- [Moderator] Prof. Adam White, Assistant Professor and Executive Director, The C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
- [Introduction] Dean A. Reuter, General Counsel | Vice President & Director, Practice Groups, The Federalist Society

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18102375Tue, 28 May 2019 10:38:20 +0000The Federalist SocietyThis episode brings you the audio from the opening panel of the Federalist Society's 7th annual Executive Branch Review Conference. The panel featured Counsels from the Department of Transportation, Department of Energy, Department of the Treasury,...
Featuring:
- Hon. Steven G. Bradbury, General Counsel, U.S. Department of Transportation
- Mr. George H. Fibbe, Deputy General Counsel, U.S. Department of Energy
- Hon. Hon. Matthew Z. Leopold, General Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
- Hon. Brent J. McIntosh, General Counsel, U.S. Department of the Treasury
- Hon. Stephen A. Vaden, General Counsel, U.S. Department of Agriculture
- [Moderator] Prof. Adam White, Assistant Professor and Executive Director, The C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
- [Introduction] Dean A. Reuter, General Counsel | Vice President & Director, Practice Groups, The Federalist Society

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>4526administrative law & regulatiocleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/department-of-interior-considers-rulemak
In 2014, the Fifth Circuit held that the Department had failed to justify its ban on religious feather possession as required by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). The Department is now considering a Petition for Rulemaking, which proposes to 1) broaden the Morton Policy to include all sincere religious believers who use protected feathers in their religious exercise—as both the Constitution and RFRA require; 2) officially promulgate this policy as a formal rule rather than rely on informal guidance, ending decades of legal limbo for those who worship with feathers; and, 3) empower Native American tribes to help combat the illegal commercialization of federally protected feathers. Join Joe Davis as he addresses the proposed rulemaking and its relationship to evolving First Amendment jurisprudence.

Featuring:
- Joe Davis, Counsel, Becket Fund for Religious Liberty

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18054069Thu, 23 May 2019 09:09:03 +0000The Federalist SocietyIt is currently a federal crime, under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, for many Native Americans to possess eagle feathers for religious use. Congress authorized the Department of the Interior (the Department) to permit an exception for...
In 2014, the Fifth Circuit held that the Department had failed to justify its ban on religious feather possession as required by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). The Department is now considering a Petition for Rulemaking, which proposes to 1) broaden the Morton Policy to include all sincere religious believers who use protected feathers in their religious exercise—as both the Constitution and RFRA require; 2) officially promulgate this policy as a formal rule rather than rely on informal guidance, ending decades of legal limbo for those who worship with feathers; and, 3) empower Native American tribes to help combat the illegal commercialization of federally protected feathers. Join Joe Davis as he addresses the proposed rulemaking and its relationship to evolving First Amendment jurisprudence.

Featuring:
- Joe Davis, Counsel, Becket Fund for Religious Liberty

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1624cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/analyzing-the-regulatory-thicket
Our co-presenters, Brooks Rainwater (National League of Cities) and Luke Wake (NFIB Small Business Legal Center), will explore whether we should maintain the status quo, seek to scale-back existing regulation, and/or winnow existing regulatory regimes.

Featuring:
- Brooks Rainwater, Senior Executive & Director, Center for City Solutions, National League of Cities
- Luke Wake, Senior Staff Attorney, NFIB Small Business Legal Center

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/18027419Mon, 20 May 2019 15:00:35 +0000The Federalist SocietyRegulation is a pervasive and increasingly a contentious issue in 21st Century America. The propriety of any given regulatory imposition may be debatable; however, in this discussion we address bigger questions about how regulation works as a...
Our co-presenters, Brooks Rainwater (National League of Cities) and Luke Wake (NFIB Small Business Legal Center), will explore whether we should maintain the status quo, seek to scale-back existing regulation, and/or winnow existing regulatory regimes.

Featuring:
- Brooks Rainwater, Senior Executive & Director, Center for City Solutions, National League of Cities
- Luke Wake, Senior Staff Attorney, NFIB Small Business Legal Center

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3748administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/race-in-admissions-texas-tech-medical-sc_1
Roger Clegg joins us to discuss the recent agreement, and its implications.

Featuring:
- Roger Clegg, President and General Counsel, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/17937365Wed, 15 May 2019 11:44:36 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Texas Tech Medical School recently approved an agreement with the United States Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, to end the use of racial preferences in their admissions process. The agreement was reached after over a decade of...
Roger Clegg joins us to discuss the recent agreement, and its implications.

Featuring:
- Roger Clegg, President and General Counsel, Center for Equal Opportunity

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3174administrative law & regulatio,civil rightscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/emerging-tech-and-regulation
Featuring:
- William Goodwin, Head of Policy, Regulatory, and Legal, Skyryse
- Ryan Hagemann, Senior Policy Fellow at International Center for Law and Economics
- Brooks Rainwater, Senior Executive & Director, Center for City Solutions, National League of Cities
- Caleb Watney, Fellow, Technology & Innovation, R Street Institute
- [Moderator] Gregory S. McNeal, Professor of Law and Public Policy, Pepperdine University and Co-Founder, AirMap

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/17916746Mon, 13 May 2019 12:16:22 +0000The Federalist SocietyThis Deep Dive episode brings you the audio from the final panel at the Pepperdine Law Review's 2019 Symposium "Regulating Tech: Present Challenges and Possible Solutions". In this panel, leading thinkers from across the emerging tech space discuss...
Featuring:
- William Goodwin, Head of Policy, Regulatory, and Legal, Skyryse
- Ryan Hagemann, Senior Policy Fellow at International Center for Law and Economics
- Brooks Rainwater, Senior Executive & Director, Center for City Solutions, National League of Cities
- Caleb Watney, Fellow, Technology & Innovation, R Street Institute
- [Moderator] Gregory S. McNeal, Professor of Law and Public Policy, Pepperdine University and Co-Founder, AirMap

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>5503administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/analyzing-the-new-proposed-rule-defining_1
For decades, the EPA and Corps have struggled to come up with a proper definition that is both consistent with the plain language of the statute, respects the state role in addressing water pollution, and is consistent with the rule of law. Does the new proposed rule address these concerns? What are some of the concerns with the proposed rule? How should the EPA and the Corps define key terms such as “tributaries” and “adjacent wetlands?” Should a final rule include intermittent waters?

Featuring:
- Deidre Duncan, Partner, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP
- Tony Francois, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- [Moderator] Daren Bakst, Senior Research Fellow in Agricultural Policy, Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies, The Heritage Foundation

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/17890964Fri, 10 May 2019 10:28:18 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn February 14, 2019, the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers published a proposed rule defining “waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act (CWA). This is a critical definition because it clarifies the...
For decades, the EPA and Corps have struggled to come up with a proper definition that is both consistent with the plain language of the statute, respects the state role in addressing water pollution, and is consistent with the rule of law. Does the new proposed rule address these concerns? What are some of the concerns with the proposed rule? How should the EPA and the Corps define key terms such as “tributaries” and “adjacent wetlands?” Should a final rule include intermittent waters?

Featuring:
- Deidre Duncan, Partner, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP
- Tony Francois, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation
- [Moderator] Daren Bakst, Senior Research Fellow in Agricultural Policy, Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies, The Heritage Foundation

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2877administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,environmental law & property rcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/how-should-the-irs-handle-cryptocurrenci_1
Topics covered will include:
- What guidance the IRS has published to date
- Calculating the fair market value of cryptocurrency
- Determining the cost basis of cryptocurrency dispositions
- Tax implications of network forks and airdropped tokens.

Featuring:
- James Foust, Senior Research Fellow, Coin Center

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/17851988Wed, 01 May 2019 15:26:23 +0000The Federalist SocietyCryptocurrencies have been around for 10 years, but there remains significant ambiguity in the tax consequences of their use. A recent report by Coin Center identifies six of those ambiguities and recommends approaches to resolving them. James Foust,...
Topics covered will include:
- What guidance the IRS has published to date
- Calculating the fair market value of cryptocurrency
- Determining the cost basis of cryptocurrency dispositions
- Tax implications of network forks and airdropped tokens.

Featuring:
- James Foust, Senior Research Fellow, Coin Center

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2688administrative law & regulatio,financial services,financial services & e-commerc,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/the-wage-hour-trifecta-dol-proposals-on-_1
Featuring:
- Tammy McCutchen, Principal, Littler Mendelson PC

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/17806758Tue, 30 Apr 2019 12:00:44 +0000The Federalist SocietyAfter over two years of regulatory inactivity, the Wage and Hour Division of the U.S. Department of Labor recently published three proposals to revise the FLSA regulations – on joint employment, the “white collar” overtime exemptions, and the regular...
Featuring:
- Tammy McCutchen, Principal, Littler Mendelson PC

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3093administrative law & regulatio,labor & employment law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/the-songwriting-industry-and-antitrust-c_1
The 77-year-old consent decrees were originally designed to regulate a marketplace that faded into history a long time ago. They pre-date streaming services, the internet, commercial FM radio, and even the birth of rock, hip-hop, and most other modern popular music genres. The music business has evolved and changed many times in the intervening years, but the consent decrees march on determining how songwriters are compensated.

The Department of Justice has recently announced a review of aged consent decrees, with Assistant U.S. Attorney General Makan Delrahim targeting the music licensing consent decrees for particular scrutiny.

Featuring:
- Kristen Osenga, Professor of Law, University of Richmond School of Law
- Mark Schultz, Professor of Law, Southern Illinois University School of Law

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/17755697Thu, 25 Apr 2019 15:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyMost people would be surprised to discover that music is among the most regulated of all the products and services they enjoy each day. Through a combination of historical accidents, momentum, and politics, the U.S. government has ended up strictly...
The 77-year-old consent decrees were originally designed to regulate a marketplace that faded into history a long time ago. They pre-date streaming services, the internet, commercial FM radio, and even the birth of rock, hip-hop, and most other modern popular music genres. The music business has evolved and changed many times in the intervening years, but the consent decrees march on determining how songwriters are compensated.

The Department of Justice has recently announced a review of aged consent decrees, with Assistant U.S. Attorney General Makan Delrahim targeting the music licensing consent decrees for particular scrutiny.

Featuring:
- Kristen Osenga, Professor of Law, University of Richmond School of Law
- Mark Schultz, Professor of Law, Southern Illinois University School of Law

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3533administrative law & regulatio,corporations,intellectual property,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/big-tech-competition-and-antitrust-enfor
Featuring:
- Neil Chilson, Senior Research Fellow for Technology and Innovation, Charles Koch Institute
- Charlotte Slaiman, Policy Counsel for Competition, Public Knowledge

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/17755665Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:00:33 +0000The Federalist SocietySenator Elizabeth Warren recently claimed that big tech companies like Amazon, Google, and Facebook have grown into monopolies that make it effectively impossible for smaller competitors to gain a foothold in the market. As a potential fix, she...
Featuring:
- Neil Chilson, Senior Research Fellow for Technology and Innovation, Charles Koch Institute
- Charlotte Slaiman, Policy Counsel for Competition, Public Knowledge

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3578administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrust,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/export-terminal-permit-denial-suit-impli
This episode deals with a pending lawsuit in the Western District of Washington: Lighthouse Resources v. Inslee. This case, which involves a dispute over permitting construction for a coal export terminal on Washington's Columbia river, has important implications for disputes between federal and state jurisdiction in environmental law and regulation.

Featuring:
- Glenn G. Lammi, Chief Counsel, Legal Studies Division and Director, Communications, Washington Legal Foundation
- Donald Kochan, Parker S. Kennedy Professor in Law and Associate Dean for Research & Faculty Development, Chapman University, Dale E. Fowler School of Law

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/17680982Fri, 19 Apr 2019 14:05:04 +0000The Federalist SocietyThis Deep Dive episode brings you the audio from a recent teleforum co-hosted by the Regulatory Transparency Project and the Federalist Society's Environmental Law & Property Rights Practice Group. This episode deals with a pending lawsuit in the...
This episode deals with a pending lawsuit in the Western District of Washington: Lighthouse Resources v. Inslee. This case, which involves a dispute over permitting construction for a coal export terminal on Washington's Columbia river, has important implications for disputes between federal and state jurisdiction in environmental law and regulation.

Featuring:
- Glenn G. Lammi, Chief Counsel, Legal Studies Division and Director, Communications, Washington Legal Foundation
- Donald Kochan, Parker S. Kennedy Professor in Law and Associate Dean for Research & Faculty Development, Chapman University, Dale E. Fowler School of Law

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3104administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,environmental law & property r,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/roger-alford-on-issues-in-antitrust-regu
Featuring:
- Roger P. Alford, Deputy Assistant Attorney General for International Affairs

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/17658805Tue, 16 Apr 2019 14:16:47 +0000The Federalist SocietyThis Deep Dive episode brings you the audio from the keynote address at the 2019 Pepperdine Law Review Symposium: "Regulating Tech: Present Challenges and Possible Solutions". In this keynote, Roger Alford, Deputy Assistant Attorney General for...
Featuring:
- Roger P. Alford, Deputy Assistant Attorney General for International Affairs

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3020administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/re-considering-co-benefits-in-environmen_1
In this episode, Adam Gustafson and Daniel Farber discuss various approaches to considering co-benefits in the cost-benefit analyses of new air pollution regulations, and whether the standing approach is the most efficient and cost-effective.

Featuring:
- Prof. Dan Farber, Sho Sato Professor of Law and Faculty Director of the Center for Law, Energy, and the Environment, University of California, Berkeley
- Adam Gustafson, Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates PLLC

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/17582161Tue, 09 Apr 2019 11:35:06 +0000The Federalist SocietyThis Deep Dive episode brings you the recording of a teleforum co-sponsored with the Federalist Society’s Environmental Law practice group. In this episode, Adam Gustafson and Daniel Farber discuss various approaches to considering co-benefits in the...
In this episode, Adam Gustafson and Daniel Farber discuss various approaches to considering co-benefits in the cost-benefit analyses of new air pollution regulations, and whether the standing approach is the most efficient and cost-effective.

Featuring:
- Prof. Dan Farber, Sho Sato Professor of Law and Faculty Director of the Center for Law, Energy, and the Environment, University of California, Berkeley
- Adam Gustafson, Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates PLLC

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1995administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/populist-antitrust
In this panel, the speakers debate varying standards for antitrust rule-making and enforcement. The merits of the Neo-Brandeisian "populist" approach are weighed against more recent "consumer-welfare" standards.

Featuring:
- Geoffrey A. Manne, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics
- William Rinehart, Director of Technology and Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
- Hal Singer, Managing Director, Econ One
- Joanna Tsai, Vice President, Charles River Associates
- [Moderator] Babette E. Boliek, Chief Economist, Federal Communications Commission and Professor of Law, Pepperdine School of Law

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/17534268Thu, 04 Apr 2019 13:56:35 +0000The Federalist SocietyThis Deep Dive episode brings you the recording of the second panel from the Pepperdine Law Review's 2019 Symposium "Regulating Tech: Present Challenges and Possible Solutions". In this panel, the speakers debate varying standards for antitrust...
In this panel, the speakers debate varying standards for antitrust rule-making and enforcement. The merits of the Neo-Brandeisian "populist" approach are weighed against more recent "consumer-welfare" standards.

Featuring:
- Geoffrey A. Manne, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics
- William Rinehart, Director of Technology and Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
- Hal Singer, Managing Director, Econ One
- Joanna Tsai, Vice President, Charles River Associates
- [Moderator] Babette E. Boliek, Chief Economist, Federal Communications Commission and Professor of Law, Pepperdine School of Law

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3862administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrustcleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/general-data-protection-regime-californi
In this panel, the speakers discuss the implications of internet privacy legislation in both California and Europe on innovation, small businesses, and consumer protection.

Featuring:
- Thomas Hazlett, Hugh H. Macaulay Endowed Professor of Economics, Clemson College of Business
- Matthew R. A. Heiman, Senior Fellow and Associate Director for Global Security, National Security Institute
- Justin “Gus” Hurwitz, Associate Professor of Law and Co-Director of Space, Cyber, and Telecom Law Program, Nebraska College of Law
- Chris Riley, Director, Public Policy, Mozilla
- [Moderator] Anna Hsia, Head of West Coast Office, ZwillGen

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/17512801Tue, 02 Apr 2019 14:08:21 +0000The Federalist SocietyThis Deep Dive episode brings you the recording of the first panel from the Pepperdine Law Review's 2019 Symposium "Regulating Tech: Present Challenges and Possible Solutions". In this panel, the speakers discuss the implications of internet privacy...
In this panel, the speakers discuss the implications of internet privacy legislation in both California and Europe on innovation, small businesses, and consumer protection.

Featuring:
- Thomas Hazlett, Hugh H. Macaulay Endowed Professor of Economics, Clemson College of Business
- Matthew R. A. Heiman, Senior Fellow and Associate Director for Global Security, National Security Institute
- Justin “Gus” Hurwitz, Associate Professor of Law and Co-Director of Space, Cyber, and Telecom Law Program, Nebraska College of Law
- Chris Riley, Director, Public Policy, Mozilla
- [Moderator] Anna Hsia, Head of West Coast Office, ZwillGen

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>4723administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,security & privacycleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/free-lunch-podcast-episode-39-kisor-vs-w
Featuring:
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, NFIB Small Business Legal Center
- Andrew Varcoe, Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates
- [Moderator] Stephen Vaden, General Counsel, United States Department of Agriculture

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/17501109Mon, 01 Apr 2019 15:05:35 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn Wednesday, March 27th, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Kisor v. Wilkie. The Supreme Court granted certiorari in Kisor to decide whether to overrule Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., 325 U.S. 410 (1945), and Auer v. Robbins, 519 U.S. 452...
Featuring:
- Karen Harned, Executive Director, NFIB Small Business Legal Center
- Andrew Varcoe, Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates
- [Moderator] Stephen Vaden, General Counsel, United States Department of Agriculture

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3227administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/pepperdine-law-review-s-2019-symposium-o
Featuring:
- Donald J. Rosenberg, Executive Vice President, General Counsel, and Corporate Secretary, Qualcomm

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/17475859Fri, 29 Mar 2019 14:06:13 +0000The Federalist SocietyThis Deep Dive episode brings you the opening address from the Pepperdine Law Review’s 2019 Symposium “Regulating Tech: Present Challenges and Possible Solutions”. The address was delivered by Donald J. Rosenberg, Executive Vice President, General...
Featuring:
- Donald J. Rosenberg, Executive Vice President, General Counsel, and Corporate Secretary, Qualcomm

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2711administrative law & regulatiocleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/the-debate-over-the-secs-accredited-inve
Featuring:
- Urska Velikonja, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center, Georgetown University
- J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/16976678Wed, 06 Feb 2019 11:00:30 +0000The Federalist SocietyThis live podcast will consider the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s accredited investor standard. This standard is used as a screen to determine the group of investors eligible to invest in offerings that are exempt from most SEC rules on...
Featuring:
- Urska Velikonja, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center, Georgetown University
- J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3499administrative law & regulatio,financial services,financial services & e-commerc,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/fintech-licensing-and-the-occ-charter
Featuring:
- Brian Knight, Director of Innovation and Governance and Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- Margaret Liu, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel, Conference of State Bank Supervisors

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/16687314Thu, 10 Jan 2019 12:00:24 +0000The Federalist SocietyInnovations in financial technology have enabled financial services to be provided in new ways and by new competitors, but under old rules. One area of tension is the role of federalism in a world where, thanks to the internet, firms can provide...
Featuring:
- Brian Knight, Director of Innovation and Governance and Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
- Margaret Liu, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel, Conference of State Bank Supervisors

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3981administrative law & regulatio,federalism,financial services,financial services & e-commerc,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/what-should-the-fhfas-2019-agenda-be
Ed DeMarco, who was Acting Director of the FHFA 2009-2014 and now heads the Housing Policy Council, will be interviewed by R Street Institute distinguished senior fellow Alex Pollock.

Featuring:
- Ed DeMarco, President, Housing Policy Council
- [Moderator] Alex J. Pollock, Distinguished Senior Fellow, R Street Institute

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/16669094Tue, 08 Jan 2019 12:00:23 +0000The Federalist SocietyJanuary 7, 2019 starts a new leadership era for the Federal Housing Finance Agency, as the new Acting Director from the Trump Administration, Joseph Otting, takes office, with the nomination of Mark Calabria as Director in process. FHFA is the...
Ed DeMarco, who was Acting Director of the FHFA 2009-2014 and now heads the Housing Policy Council, will be interviewed by R Street Institute distinguished senior fellow Alex Pollock.

Featuring:
- Ed DeMarco, President, Housing Policy Council
- [Moderator] Alex J. Pollock, Distinguished Senior Fellow, R Street Institute

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3167administrative law & regulatio,financial services,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/examining-the-california-consumer-privac
Featuring:
- Prof. Eric Goldman, Professor of Law and Co-Director of the High Tech Law Institute, Santa Clara University School of Law
- Lindsey L. Tonsager, Partner, Covington & Burling
- [Moderator] Justin (Gus) Hurwitz, Assistant Professor of Law and Co-Director of Space, Cyber, and Telecom Law Program, University of Nebraska College of Law

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/15657422Wed, 05 Sep 2018 11:00:27 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn June 28, 2018, the California legislature enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (“CCPA”). This legislation follows more than two decades of debate about potential federal privacy regulation, a tumultuous year of high-profile privacy...
Featuring:
- Prof. Eric Goldman, Professor of Law and Co-Director of the High Tech Law Institute, Santa Clara University School of Law
- Lindsey L. Tonsager, Partner, Covington & Burling
- [Moderator] Justin (Gus) Hurwitz, Assistant Professor of Law and Co-Director of Space, Cyber, and Telecom Law Program, University of Nebraska College of Law

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3682administrative law & regulatio,federalism,regulatory transparency projec,security & privacy,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/net-neutrality-and-federalism
Featuring:
- Justin (Gus) Hurwitz, Assistant Professor of Law and Co-Director of Space, Cyber, and Telecom Law Program, University of Nebraska College of Law
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Technology Policy Program, Mercatus Center at George Mason University
- [Moderator] Geoffrey A. Manne, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/15267235Fri, 13 Jul 2018 12:00:10 +0000The Federalist SocietyDespite the Federal Communication Commission’s decision in December 2017 to eliminate the common carrier regulations for Internet services — the so-called net neutrality rules the FCC created in 2015 — the net neutrality debate rages on. The Trump FCC...
Featuring:
- Justin (Gus) Hurwitz, Assistant Professor of Law and Co-Director of Space, Cyber, and Telecom Law Program, University of Nebraska College of Law
- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Technology Policy Program, Mercatus Center at George Mason University
- [Moderator] Geoffrey A. Manne, Executive Director, International Center for Law & Economics

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3803administrative law & regulatio,federalism & separation of pow,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/epa-s-cafe-whats-on-the-menu-for-fuel-ec
Featuring:
- Sean H. Donahue, Partner, Donahue, Goldberg & Weaver, LLP
- Jacqueline Glassman, Partner, King & Spalding, LLP
- [Moderator] James Conde, Associate, Boyden Gray & Associates, PLLC

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/15176281Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:00:48 +0000The Federalist SocietyEPA Administrator Scott Pruitt and Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao are proposing to roll back the Obama Administration’s fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards for model years 2022 to 2025. The proposed rollback will have vast political and...
Featuring:
- Sean H. Donahue, Partner, Donahue, Goldberg & Weaver, LLP
- Jacqueline Glassman, Partner, King & Spalding, LLP
- [Moderator] James Conde, Associate, Boyden Gray & Associates, PLLC

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3570administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,federalism,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/what-to-do-about-facebook-on-data-privac
Featuring:
- Thomas Hazlett, H.H. Macaulay Endowed Professor of Economics, Clemson University
- Jamil Jaffer, Adjunct Professor, NSI Founder, and Director, National Security Law & Policy Program, Antonin Scalia Law School
- Megan Stifel, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Cyber Statecraft Initiative, Atlantic Council
- [Moderator] Matthew Heiman, Visiting Fellow, National Security Institute, Antonin Scalia Law School

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/15002054Thu, 07 Jun 2018 12:00:22 +0000The Federalist SocietyFacebook is not getting many "likes" these days following revelations that Cambridge Analytica accessed personal information about Facebook users without obtaining clear consent. The reaction from politicians, regulators, and the marketplace has been...
Featuring:
- Thomas Hazlett, H.H. Macaulay Endowed Professor of Economics, Clemson University
- Jamil Jaffer, Adjunct Professor, NSI Founder, and Director, National Security Law & Policy Program, Antonin Scalia Law School
- Megan Stifel, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Cyber Statecraft Initiative, Atlantic Council
- [Moderator] Matthew Heiman, Visiting Fellow, National Security Institute, Antonin Scalia Law School

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>4141administrative law & regulatio,corporations,regulatory transparency projec,securities & antitrust,security & privacy,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/tennessee-licensing-board-alarmed-by-ent
Featuring:
- Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Beacon Center of Tennessee
- Adam Jackson, Founder, Edge AI

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/14735623Mon, 07 May 2018 12:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyAdam Jackson became a highly trained U.S. soldier who provided cutting-edge security to military bases and embassies. Now as a civilian, he seeks to provide similar protection for American communities through software he has developed that can...
Featuring:
- Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Beacon Center of Tennessee
- Adam Jackson, Founder, Edge AI

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3395administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,state governmentscleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/arizona-dumps-deference-the-beginning-of
This live podcast will explore this new law, discuss how it might change state agency rulemaking and enforcement, and also examine how the law might address concerns regarding judicial bias and other issues. Importantly, this program will also consider whether this legislation can serve as a model for the rest of the country, and the federal government.

Featuring:
- Philip Hamburger, Maurice and Hilda Friedman Professor of Law, Columbia Law School
- Jonathan Riches, Director of National Litigation, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/14685668Tue, 01 May 2018 12:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyWe live in a system where regulators make rules, investigate alleged violations of the rules, and then adjudicate those violations before an Administrative Law Judge who is a member of the agency. When agency decisions are appealed to the traditional...
This live podcast will explore this new law, discuss how it might change state agency rulemaking and enforcement, and also examine how the law might address concerns regarding judicial bias and other issues. Importantly, this program will also consider whether this legislation can serve as a model for the rest of the country, and the federal government.

Featuring:
- Philip Hamburger, Maurice and Hilda Friedman Professor of Law, Columbia Law School
- Jonathan Riches, Director of National Litigation, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3399administrative law & regulatio,federalism,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/analyzing-how-epa-is-addressing-secret-s
Featuring:
- Daren Bakst, Senior Research Fellow in Agriculture Policy, Institute for Economic Freedom, The Heritage Foundation
- Richard B. Belzer Ph.D., Independent Consultant in Regulation, Risk, Economics & Information Quality

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/14625711Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:00:32 +0000The Federalist SocietyEPA Administrator Scott Pruitt announced that his agency would no longer allow the use of “secret science” in developing federal regulations. Specifically, the agency will only use scientific studies to develop regulations when the data and...
Featuring:
- Daren Bakst, Senior Research Fellow in Agriculture Policy, Institute for Economic Freedom, The Heritage Foundation
- Richard B. Belzer Ph.D., Independent Consultant in Regulation, Risk, Economics & Information Quality

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3576administrative law & regulatio,environmental & energy law,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/virginia-s-un-happy-hour-is-the-state-re
In this live podcast, Chef Geoff tells his story of how these restrictions have driven up the cost of doing business, how they have forced him to alter his successful business model, and why he ultimately decided to sue Virginia over them. Chef Geoff’s attorney, Anastasia Boden of the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), will discuss the lawsuit, explaining why she believes economic regulations are a growing threat to businesses and share what PLF is doing to fight for economic liberty and free speech in the courts.

Featuring:
- Anastasia P. Boden, Attorney, Economic Liberty Project, Pacific Legal Foundation
- Geoffrey Tracy, Founder, Chef Geoff's

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/14578864Wed, 18 Apr 2018 14:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn Virginia, it’s perfectly legal to have a happy hour; it’s just illegal to talk about it. The state has several advertising restrictions that opponents claim are outdated and prevent businesses from communicating entirely truthful information about...
In this live podcast, Chef Geoff tells his story of how these restrictions have driven up the cost of doing business, how they have forced him to alter his successful business model, and why he ultimately decided to sue Virginia over them. Chef Geoff’s attorney, Anastasia Boden of the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), will discuss the lawsuit, explaining why she believes economic regulations are a growing threat to businesses and share what PLF is doing to fight for economic liberty and free speech in the courts.

Featuring:
- Anastasia P. Boden, Attorney, Economic Liberty Project, Pacific Legal Foundation
- Geoffrey Tracy, Founder, Chef Geoff's

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3037administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/self-driving-vehicles-addressing-the-cha
Featuring:
- Ryan Hagemann, Director of Technology Policy, Niskanen Center
- Jamie Boone, Senior Director, Government Affairs, Consumer Technology Association

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/14466042Wed, 04 Apr 2018 12:00:47 +0000The Federalist SocietySelf-driving vehicles may be on American roads sooner than many think. As a result, the Department of Transportation and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration have been increasingly focused on examining the potential regulatory barriers...
Featuring:
- Ryan Hagemann, Director of Technology Policy, Niskanen Center
- Jamie Boone, Senior Director, Government Affairs, Consumer Technology Association

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3523administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/is-the-fda-s-rule-on-cigars-vaping-produ
In addition to the usual regulatory questions, our speakers raise fundamental constitutional challenges to the Rule. Mr. Gaziano and Pacific Legal Foundation are representing nine vaping retailers and harm reduction advocates who filed three lawsuits arguing that the Rule is invalid because it was issued by an FDA employee who is not constitutionally authorized to issue regulations pursuant to the Appointments Clause. Those suits raise key questions of democratic accountability and Executive Power: Who has the authority to impose a massive web of regulations on an entire industry? Mr. Edney represents several cigar and pipe tobacco trade associations and other individual cigar manufacturers and retailers challenging the Rule. Even with the postponement of some compliance deadlines, the Appointments Clause and First Amendment challenges in both sets of cases are ripe. If the FDA’s arguments prevail, the government could require large warnings blanketing any package or advertisements for virtually any product and ban truthful statements about those products without bureaucratic pre-approval.

Featuring:
- Todd F. Gaziano, Director, Center for the Separation of Powers, Pacific Legal Foundation
- Michael J. Edney, Chairman and Partner, Norton Rose Fulbright's White Collar Criminal Defense Practice Group

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/14450696Tue, 03 Apr 2018 12:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyInvoking the Tobacco Control Act, the FDA issued an omnibus regulation of cigars, pipe tobacco, and vaping products in 2016. That Rule required all of these products to go through an FDA review process similar to that for prescription drugs and...
In addition to the usual regulatory questions, our speakers raise fundamental constitutional challenges to the Rule. Mr. Gaziano and Pacific Legal Foundation are representing nine vaping retailers and harm reduction advocates who filed three lawsuits arguing that the Rule is invalid because it was issued by an FDA employee who is not constitutionally authorized to issue regulations pursuant to the Appointments Clause. Those suits raise key questions of democratic accountability and Executive Power: Who has the authority to impose a massive web of regulations on an entire industry? Mr. Edney represents several cigar and pipe tobacco trade associations and other individual cigar manufacturers and retailers challenging the Rule. Even with the postponement of some compliance deadlines, the Appointments Clause and First Amendment challenges in both sets of cases are ripe. If the FDA’s arguments prevail, the government could require large warnings blanketing any package or advertisements for virtually any product and ban truthful statements about those products without bureaucratic pre-approval.

Featuring:
- Todd F. Gaziano, Director, Center for the Separation of Powers, Pacific Legal Foundation
- Michael J. Edney, Chairman and Partner, Norton Rose Fulbright's White Collar Criminal Defense Practice Group

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3655administrative law & regulatio,first amendment,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/the-commenting-power-agency-accountabili
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) requires that most regulations promulgated by administrative agencies go through a process called “notice and comment rulemaking.” Stripped to its basics, that means that the agency must give notice of a proposed rulemaking and then give the public a chance to comment. The law allows ordinary citizens, as much as sophisticated interest groups, opportunities to participate in, and have opinions heard on, the development of regulations. In a recent article (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3006157), Professor Donald Kochan calls this the underappreciated “commenting power.” The duty for agencies to consider and respond to significant comments is what makes commenting so powerful. In addition to Professor Kochan's article, Argive — a Silicon Valley non-profit that seeks to make regulatory processes more accountable and accessible to all — recently issued a report (https://static1.squarespace.com/static/586bee97c534a5731df8f6c4/t/5942c4c0be6594acc08fa2a5/1497547972474/Argive+Improving+Regulations.gov-2.pdf) on what they perceived as deficiencies in and suggested solutions for the actual commenting system.

In this live podcast, Professor Kochan will explain the commenting process, the scope of agencies duties to respond to comments, and why it is important to comment whether you support or oppose a rule. The podcast will also discuss some recent and older examples of cases where agency’s failure to take comments seriously has invalidated or jeopardized rulemaking efforts. Maleka Momand, co-author of the Argive report and former President of Argive, will cover the points raised and solutions suggested in the report. Both speakers may also comment on a new Administrative Conference of the U.S. project studying public engagement in rulemaking (https://www.acus.gov/research-projects/public-engagement-rulemaking).

Featuring:
- Donald J. Kochan, Parker S. Kennedy Professor in Law and Associate Dean for Research & Faculty Development, Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law
- Maleka Momand, Co-Founder and CEO, Esper, Former-President, Argive

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/14360357Wed, 21 Mar 2018 12:00:22 +0000The Federalist SocietyDid you know that you have a say in the U.S. government’s regulatory process? The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) requires that most regulations promulgated by administrative agencies go through a process called “notice and comment rulemaking.”...
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) requires that most regulations promulgated by administrative agencies go through a process called “notice and comment rulemaking.” Stripped to its basics, that means that the agency must give notice of a proposed rulemaking and then give the public a chance to comment. The law allows ordinary citizens, as much as sophisticated interest groups, opportunities to participate in, and have opinions heard on, the development of regulations. In a recent article (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3006157), Professor Donald Kochan calls this the underappreciated “commenting power.” The duty for agencies to consider and respond to significant comments is what makes commenting so powerful. In addition to Professor Kochan's article, Argive — a Silicon Valley non-profit that seeks to make regulatory processes more accountable and accessible to all — recently issued a report (https://static1.squarespace.com/static/586bee97c534a5731df8f6c4/t/5942c4c0be6594acc08fa2a5/1497547972474/Argive+Improving+Regulations.gov-2.pdf) on what they perceived as deficiencies in and suggested solutions for the actual commenting system.

In this live podcast, Professor Kochan will explain the commenting process, the scope of agencies duties to respond to comments, and why it is important to comment whether you support or oppose a rule. The podcast will also discuss some recent and older examples of cases where agency’s failure to take comments seriously has invalidated or jeopardized rulemaking efforts. Maleka Momand, co-author of the Argive report and former President of Argive, will cover the points raised and solutions suggested in the report. Both speakers may also comment on a new Administrative Conference of the U.S. project studying public engagement in rulemaking (https://www.acus.gov/research-projects/public-engagement-rulemaking).

Featuring:
- Donald J. Kochan, Parker S. Kennedy Professor in Law and Associate Dean for Research & Faculty Development, Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law
- Maleka Momand, Co-Founder and CEO, Esper, Former-President, Argive

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3671administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/regulatory-scorecard-a-conversation-with
Featuring:
- Neomi Rao, Administrator, OIRA

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/14011810Thu, 08 Feb 2018 12:00:42 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn 2017, the U.S. experienced a dramatic shift in regulatory policy at the federal level. This shift is attributable to a new presidential administration that has made regulatory reform a priority. This priority is evidenced by numerous regulatory...
Featuring:
- Neomi Rao, Administrator, OIRA

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2344administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/en-banc-d-c-circuit-upholds-cfpb-constit
Featuring:
- Ambassador C. Boyden Gray, Founding Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates
- Adam Gustafson, Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/13984254Mon, 05 Feb 2018 10:45:01 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn Wednesday, January 31, the full United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit voted 7-3 to uphold the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) against a separation-of-powers challenge to its uniquely independent structure....
Featuring:
- Ambassador C. Boyden Gray, Founding Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates
- Adam Gustafson, Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3597administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/fintech-and-federal-alternatives-to-stat
And yet, money transmitters must still go regulator to regulator, explain their business, and become licensed in 53 states and territories under statutes that were originally drafted to keep check-cashers honest. Some argue that a federal alternative to that regulatory structure needs to be developed if the US is to stay competitive in financial technologies.

Peter Van Valkenburgh will discuss these issues and Coin Center's new discussion paper that explores how this federal structure could be developed.

Featuring:
- Peter Van Valkenburgh, Research Director, Coin Center

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/13946715Wed, 31 Jan 2018 12:00:38 +0000The Federalist SocietyToday's money transmitters are Internet businesses. The money is digital, it might even be cryptocurrency. The business can have customers in every state and nation from day one. The services are diverse and innovative from instant payments between a...
And yet, money transmitters must still go regulator to regulator, explain their business, and become licensed in 53 states and territories under statutes that were originally drafted to keep check-cashers honest. Some argue that a federal alternative to that regulatory structure needs to be developed if the US is to stay competitive in financial technologies.

Peter Van Valkenburgh will discuss these issues and Coin Center's new discussion paper that explores how this federal structure could be developed.

Featuring:
- Peter Van Valkenburgh, Research Director, Coin Center

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3046administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/shining-a-light-on-regulatory-dark-matte
Featuring:
- Paul Noe, Vice President, Public Policy, American Forest & Paper Association
- Stephen Cox, Deputy Associate Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/13886156Wed, 24 Jan 2018 12:00:38 +0000The Federalist SocietyFor many years, concerns have been raised that the development and use of guidance documents by agencies should be better managed and more transparent and accountable. There also has been growing concern that, in some cases, guidance documents are...
Featuring:
- Paul Noe, Vice President, Public Policy, American Forest & Paper Association
- Stephen Cox, Deputy Associate Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3401administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/the-2017-mercatus-report-the-implication
McLaughlin will discuss his recent study (with Duke University professors Bentley Coffey and Pietro Peretto) that examines regulation’s effect on firms’ investment choices and, consequentially, on economic growth. Using a 22-industry dataset that covers 1977 through 2012, the study finds that regulation—by distorting the investment choices that lead to innovation—has created a considerable drag on the economy, amounting to an average reduction in the annual growth rate of the US gross domestic product (GDP) of 0.8 percent.

KEY FINDINGS

Economic growth in the United States has, on average, been slowed by 0.8 percent per year since 1980 owing to the cumulative effects of regulation:
- If regulation had been held constant at levels observed in 1980, the US economy would have been about 25 percent larger than it actually was as of 2012.
- This means that in 2012, the economy was $4 trillion smaller than it would have been in the absence of regulatory growth since 1980.
- This amounts to a loss of approximately $13,000 per capita, a significant amount of money for most American workers.

Featuring:
- Patrick McLaughlin, Director, Program for Economic Research on Regulation, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/13878232Tue, 23 Jan 2018 12:00:20 +0000The Federalist SocietyFederal regulations have accumulated over many decades, so much that it would require over three years to read through them all if you started today. The buildup of regulations over time leads to duplicative, obsolete, conflicting, and even...
McLaughlin will discuss his recent study (with Duke University professors Bentley Coffey and Pietro Peretto) that examines regulation’s effect on firms’ investment choices and, consequentially, on economic growth. Using a 22-industry dataset that covers 1977 through 2012, the study finds that regulation—by distorting the investment choices that lead to innovation—has created a considerable drag on the economy, amounting to an average reduction in the annual growth rate of the US gross domestic product (GDP) of 0.8 percent.

KEY FINDINGS

Economic growth in the United States has, on average, been slowed by 0.8 percent per year since 1980 owing to the cumulative effects of regulation:
- If regulation had been held constant at levels observed in 1980, the US economy would have been about 25 percent larger than it actually was as of 2012.
- This means that in 2012, the economy was $4 trillion smaller than it would have been in the absence of regulatory growth since 1980.
- This amounts to a loss of approximately $13,000 per capita, a significant amount of money for most American workers.

Featuring:
- Patrick McLaughlin, Director, Program for Economic Research on Regulation, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2301administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/does-the-migratory-bird-treaty-act-prohi
Featuring:
- Gary Lawkowski, Counselor to the Deputy Secretary, Department of the Interior

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/13832939Wed, 17 Jan 2018 12:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyPursuant to a modern interpretation of a 100-year old law, every American who owns a cat, drives a car, or owns a home with windows is a potential criminal. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act is a strict liability statute that was passed in 1918 to...
Featuring:
- Gary Lawkowski, Counselor to the Deputy Secretary, Department of the Interior

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>2065administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/regulatory-hurdles-for-entrepreneurs-the
Join us for this Deep Dive podcast to hear the full story of Project Belle and the Tennessee State Board of Cosmetology.

Featuring:
- Armand Lauzon, Founder & CEO, Belle
- Braden H. Boucek, Director of Litigation, Beacon Center of Tennessee

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/13817811Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:00:28 +0000The Federalist SocietyArmand Lauzon created a cutting-edge business called Project Belle. Belle is a service that connects consumers directly with health and beauty professionals for in-home or at-work care in Tennessee. A Tennessee salon owner who “found this type of...
Join us for this Deep Dive podcast to hear the full story of Project Belle and the Tennessee State Board of Cosmetology.

Featuring:
- Armand Lauzon, Founder & CEO, Belle
- Braden H. Boucek, Director of Litigation, Beacon Center of Tennessee

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3262administrative law & regulatio,federalism & separation of pow,regulatory transparency projec,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/off-label-promotion-and-free-speech-in-m
This podcast will cover the First Amendment implications of the FDA's regulation, legal history and major court decisions and settlements, and how state governments are handling the issue.

Featuring:
- Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/13785958Thu, 11 Jan 2018 12:00:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyFederal regulation strictly limits how pharmaceutical companies share information about the legal use of their products. Companies that promote or advertise the use of medicines or medical devices in ways that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)...
This podcast will cover the First Amendment implications of the FDA's regulation, legal history and major court decisions and settlements, and how state governments are handling the issue.

Featuring:
- Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater Institute

Visit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3495healthcare,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/is-the-newest-part-of-the-copyright-act-
Nearly twenty years ago, Congress passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to combat online infringement. According to some critics, this most recent major update to the Copyright Act is one of the most outdated parts of the law. The discontent stems from the DMCA's "notice and takedown system," which obligates online services to take down pirated works posted by users, but only after the owner identifies the specific file at a specific location on its server. If another copy – or many other copies – of that same file pop up on the same service, each requires a new and separate notice. The authors of the DMCA likely never envisioned the speed and scale of online infringement. Last year, copyright owners sent Google well over 900 million takedown requests. Small creative businesses and individual creators find it impossible to keep up. Neither creators nor online services are satisfied with this state of affairs, although each disagrees strongly as to what to do about it. Is the DMCA an imperfect, but workable solution to a challenging problem? Or has it become outdated and impractical? What are the merits and costs of potential reforms?

This live podcast is held in conjunction with the release of a paper authored by members of the Regulatory Transparency Project's Intellectual Property working group. The paper is called "Creativity and Innovation Unchained: Why Copyright Law Must be Updated for the Digital Age by Simplifying It." This paper, which discusses the DMCA notice and takedown issue, is available for viewing and download at https://regproject.org/paper/creativity-innovation-unchained-copyright-law-must-updated-digital-age-simplifying/.

Featuring:
- Jennifer L. Pariser, Vice President of Copyright and Legal Affairs, Motion Picture Association
- Maria Schneider, GRAMMY Award Winning Artist
- Mark. F. Schultz, Associate Professor of Law, Southern Illinois University School of Law

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/13709485Tue, 02 Jan 2018 09:48:31 +0000The Federalist SocietyIs the Newest Part of the Copyright Act Antiquated? Unchaining Creativity and Innovation. Nearly twenty years ago, Congress passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to combat online infringement. According to some critics, this most recent...
Nearly twenty years ago, Congress passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to combat online infringement. According to some critics, this most recent major update to the Copyright Act is one of the most outdated parts of the law. The discontent stems from the DMCA's "notice and takedown system," which obligates online services to take down pirated works posted by users, but only after the owner identifies the specific file at a specific location on its server. If another copy – or many other copies – of that same file pop up on the same service, each requires a new and separate notice. The authors of the DMCA likely never envisioned the speed and scale of online infringement. Last year, copyright owners sent Google well over 900 million takedown requests. Small creative businesses and individual creators find it impossible to keep up. Neither creators nor online services are satisfied with this state of affairs, although each disagrees strongly as to what to do about it. Is the DMCA an imperfect, but workable solution to a challenging problem? Or has it become outdated and impractical? What are the merits and costs of potential reforms?

This live podcast is held in conjunction with the release of a paper authored by members of the Regulatory Transparency Project's Intellectual Property working group. The paper is called "Creativity and Innovation Unchained: Why Copyright Law Must be Updated for the Digital Age by Simplifying It." This paper, which discusses the DMCA notice and takedown issue, is available for viewing and download at https://regproject.org/paper/creativity-innovation-unchained-copyright-law-must-updated-digital-age-simplifying/.

Featuring:
- Jennifer L. Pariser, Vice President of Copyright and Legal Affairs, Motion Picture Association
- Maria Schneider, GRAMMY Award Winning Artist
- Mark. F. Schultz, Associate Professor of Law, Southern Illinois University School of Law

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3971intellectual property,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/exploring-net-neutrality-and-the-implica_1
Featuring:
- Brent Skorup, Research Fellow in the Technology Policy Program, Mercatus Center at George Mason University

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/13583778Thu, 14 Dec 2017 15:42:03 +0000The Federalist SocietyFor about a decade, some legal scholars have urged the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to regulate the Internet to ensure "net neutrality," a content nondiscrimination standard for Internet service providers like Comcast and Verizon. This...
Featuring:
- Brent Skorup, Research Fellow in the Technology Policy Program, Mercatus Center at George Mason University

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3131regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/discussion-on-the-wassenaar-arrangement
But the agreed-to controls control not only malicious "intrusion" software items, but virtually any type of software, hardware, and technology designed to counter "intrusion" software. The controls have also been ineffective in actually reaching their intended targets—barring specific companies from exporting specific tools to specific end-users for specific purposes—and international implementation has been widely divergent.

Featuring:
- Alan Cohn, Counsel, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
- Stewart Baker, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
- [Moderator] Matthew Heiman, Vice President, Corporate Secretary & Associate General Counsel, Johnson Controls

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/13238275Fri, 03 Nov 2017 14:40:56 +0000The Federalist SocietyShould software be regulated like a military weapon? That's the direction in which most Western nations seem to be moving, under the guidance of the international Wassenaar Arrangement governing international export controls. During its 2013 plenary...
But the agreed-to controls control not only malicious "intrusion" software items, but virtually any type of software, hardware, and technology designed to counter "intrusion" software. The controls have also been ineffective in actually reaching their intended targets—barring specific companies from exporting specific tools to specific end-users for specific purposes—and international implementation has been widely divergent.

Featuring:
- Alan Cohn, Counsel, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
- Stewart Baker, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
- [Moderator] Matthew Heiman, Vice President, Corporate Secretary & Associate General Counsel, Johnson Controls

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3689administrative law & regulatio,regulatory transparency projec,security & privacycleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/discussion-on-u-s-treasury-reports
Featuring:
- J.W. Verret, Assistant Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School
- Wayne Abernathy, Executive VP for Financial Institutions Policy and Regulatory Affairs, American Bankers Association

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/13045894Mon, 16 Oct 2017 09:52:52 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn Friday, October 6, Treasury issued the second of its reports to the President on Core Principles for Financial Supervision. When it comes to financial regulation, the Treasury Department has little formal authority. Yet, when Treasury wants to, it...
Featuring:
- J.W. Verret, Assistant Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School
- Wayne Abernathy, Executive VP for Financial Institutions Policy and Regulatory Affairs, American Bankers Association

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3863financial services,regulatory transparency projeccleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/can-government-regulation-keep-pace-with
Featuring:
- Gregory McNeal, Professor of Law, Pepperdine University School of Law
- Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://api.spreaker.com/episode/12958258Thu, 05 Oct 2017 09:15:43 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn this episode of the Fourth Branch podcast, Gregory McNeal, Pepperdine Law Professor and Chairman of the RTP’s IT and Emerging Technology working group, partners with Mercatus Senior Research Fellow Adam Thierer to discuss the law and policy...
Featuring:
- Gregory McNeal, Professor of Law, Pepperdine University School of Law
- Adam Thierer, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3018administrative law & regulatio,telecommunications & electronicleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/heimlich-maneuver-on-operation-choke-poi
Featuring:
- Pete Patterson, Partner, Cooper & Kirk, PLLC

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>https://www.fed-soc.org/library/audiolib/20170827_FreeLunchPodcastE10.mp3Mon, 28 Aug 2017 17:03:45 +0000The Federalist SocietyOn August 16, the Department of Justice issued a letter repudiating the Department’s participation in an initiative known as “Operation Choke Point” during the Obama administration. Operation Choke Point sought to deprive members of disfavored...
Featuring:
- Pete Patterson, Partner, Cooper & Kirk, PLLC

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>1914cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/is-there-a-death-squad-at-the-u-s-patent
This live podcast is held in conjunction with the Monday, August 14 release of a paper authored by members of the Regulatory Transparency Project’s Intellectual Property Working Group. The paper is called “Crippling the Innovation Economy: Regulatory Overreach at the Patent Office.” This paper, which discusses this new administrative tribunal at the Patent Office, is available for viewing and download at https://regproject.org/paper/crippling-innovation-economy-regulatory-overreach-patent-office/.

Featuring:
- Josh Malone, Inventor, Bunch O Balloons
- Kristen Osenga, Professor, University of Richmond School of Law
- Brian O’Shaughnessy, Partner, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>http://www.fed-soc.org/library/audiolib/20170818_FreeLunchPodcastE9.mp3Mon, 21 Aug 2017 16:41:15 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn 2011, Congress created a new administrative tribunal in the U.S. Patent Office with the power to cancel previously granted patents, called the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The PTAB was created to provide an efficient and inexpensive...
This live podcast is held in conjunction with the Monday, August 14 release of a paper authored by members of the Regulatory Transparency Project’s Intellectual Property Working Group. The paper is called “Crippling the Innovation Economy: Regulatory Overreach at the Patent Office.” This paper, which discusses this new administrative tribunal at the Patent Office, is available for viewing and download at https://regproject.org/paper/crippling-innovation-economy-regulatory-overreach-patent-office/.

Featuring:
- Josh Malone, Inventor, Bunch O Balloons
- Kristen Osenga, Professor, University of Richmond School of Law
- Brian O’Shaughnessy, Partner, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3837cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/bureaucracy-in-america
Featuring:
- Joseph Postell, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Colorado-Colorado Springs

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>http://www.fed-soc.org/library/audiolib/20170810_FreeLunchPodcastE8.mp3Fri, 11 Aug 2017 15:05:42 +0000The Federalist SocietyAdministrative agencies, and extensive regulation of the economy, have always existed in America. But from the founding to 1900, agencies were constrained by basic principles of representation, separation of powers, and judicial review. In his new...
Featuring:
- Joseph Postell, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Colorado-Colorado Springs

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3438cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/cardiac-arrest-a-cautionary-tale
But in 2011, the federal government accused Howard of marketing medical devices for unapproved uses – a practice prohibited by the FDA. Howard professed his innocence from the beginning but, when prosecutors set their sights on Howard and his company, there was no guarantee that he would save his company from closing or himself from prison.

5 years, 121 attorneys, and $25 million in legal fees later, his life’s work and freedom rested in the hands of 12 strangers in a San Antonio jury room. Would Howard and his company be vindicated by the verdict, or had he made the biggest mistake of his life by challenging the federal government?

Featuring:
- Howard Root, Former CEO of Vascular Solutions, Inc.

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>http://www.fed-soc.org/library/audiolib/20170803_FreeLunchPodcastE7.mp3Thu, 03 Aug 2017 15:52:12 +0000The Federalist SocietyHoward Root started Vascular Solutions, a medical device company, from scratch. Fifteen years later, his Minnesota company had created over 500 American jobs and developed more than 50 new medical devices that saved and improved lives. But in 2011,...
But in 2011, the federal government accused Howard of marketing medical devices for unapproved uses – a practice prohibited by the FDA. Howard professed his innocence from the beginning but, when prosecutors set their sights on Howard and his company, there was no guarantee that he would save his company from closing or himself from prison.

5 years, 121 attorneys, and $25 million in legal fees later, his life’s work and freedom rested in the hands of 12 strangers in a San Antonio jury room. Would Howard and his company be vindicated by the verdict, or had he made the biggest mistake of his life by challenging the federal government?

Featuring:
- Howard Root, Former CEO of Vascular Solutions, Inc.

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3306cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/iot-rise-of-the-machines
How should those risks be addressed? Is this a case where the market will provide a solution? Or is this one of those instances where regulation is required? Are manufacturers liable for insecure products? If not, who pays when something goes wrong?

Featuring:
- Paul Rosenzweig, Principal, Red Branch Law & Consulting, PLLC
- Suhail A. Khan, Director of External Affairs, Microsoft

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>http://www.fed-soc.org/library/audiolib/20170727_FreeLunchPodcastE6.mp3Fri, 28 Jul 2017 16:30:11 +0000The Federalist SocietyThe Internet of Things (IoT) refers to the connection of various devices to the Internet. The Internet of Things (IoT) is growing in prominence almost exponentially. Today, manufacturers are creating products with cyber capabilities that range from...
How should those risks be addressed? Is this a case where the market will provide a solution? Or is this one of those instances where regulation is required? Are manufacturers liable for insecure products? If not, who pays when something goes wrong?

Featuring:
- Paul Rosenzweig, Principal, Red Branch Law & Consulting, PLLC
- Suhail A. Khan, Director of External Affairs, Microsoft

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3585cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/laws-regulations-and-regulatory-dark-mat
Featuring:
- Wayne Crews, VP for Policy & Director of Technology Studies, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>http://www.fed-soc.org/library/audiolib/20170719_FreeLunchPodcastE5.mp3Thu, 20 Jul 2017 16:39:20 +0000The Federalist SocietyCongress passes and the President signs several dozen laws every year. Meanwhile, federal departments and agencies issue well over 3,000 regulations of varying significance. Does Congress have a clear grasp of the amount and cost of the thousands of...
Featuring:
- Wayne Crews, VP for Policy & Director of Technology Studies, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>4102cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/labmd-v-ftc-a-david-against-goliath-stor
Following oral arguments last month before a panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, it seems entirely possible that he will prevail. In so doing, he may well topple key pillars of the FTC’s cybersecurity and online privacy edifice.

Featuring:
- Michael J. Daugherty, Founder, President and CEO, LabMD
- Gus Hurwitz, Assistant Professor of Law, Nebraska College of Law

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>http://www.fed-soc.org/library/audiolib/20170718_FreeLunchPodcastE4.mp3Wed, 19 Jul 2017 18:03:25 +0000The Federalist SocietyMike Daugherty is the CEO of LabMD, a medical testing lab. He has spent most of the last decade defending his company against charges that it had deficient cybersecurity practices. The early years of this battle are recorded in his book, "The Devil...
Following oral arguments last month before a panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, it seems entirely possible that he will prevail. In so doing, he may well topple key pillars of the FTC’s cybersecurity and online privacy edifice.

Featuring:
- Michael J. Daugherty, Founder, President and CEO, LabMD
- Gus Hurwitz, Assistant Professor of Law, Nebraska College of Law

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3838cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/uber-of-the-sky-the-story-of-flytenow
The service was a great win-win for both parties. That is until the FAA caught wind of all the innovation and deemed the online nature of Flytenow to be prohibited. The FAA reasoned that posting flight plans online, as opposed to physical bulletin boards, was impermissible because it could attract a broader segment of the public. Flytenow, with the help of The Goldwater Institute, challenged the FAA’s ruling all the way to the Supreme Court; but unfortunately, the Court declined to take up the case in January of this year, effectively upholding the lower courts' siding with the FAA.

Flytenow is now pursuing a legislative route to make ridesharing in aviation a reality.

Featuring:
- Jonathan Riches, Director of National Litigation, Goldwater Institute
- Alan Guichard, CFO and Co-Founder, Flytenow, Inc.

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>http://www.fed-soc.org/library/audiolib/20170716_RTPE3v1.0.mp3Mon, 17 Jul 2017 21:20:20 +0000The Federalist SocietyFlytenow was a ridesharing platform for small planes. The company was founded by two pilots, Alan Guichard and Matt Voska. This kind of cost-sharing arrangement was explicitly authorized by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The Flytenow...
The service was a great win-win for both parties. That is until the FAA caught wind of all the innovation and deemed the online nature of Flytenow to be prohibited. The FAA reasoned that posting flight plans online, as opposed to physical bulletin boards, was impermissible because it could attract a broader segment of the public. Flytenow, with the help of The Goldwater Institute, challenged the FAA’s ruling all the way to the Supreme Court; but unfortunately, the Court declined to take up the case in January of this year, effectively upholding the lower courts' siding with the FAA.

Flytenow is now pursuing a legislative route to make ridesharing in aviation a reality.

Featuring:
- Jonathan Riches, Director of National Litigation, Goldwater Institute
- Alan Guichard, CFO and Co-Founder, Flytenow, Inc.

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3142cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/sec-increased-use-of-administrative-proc
Take for instance, the case of Eric Wanger. In 2010, Mr. Wanger ran a multi-family office, employed 11 people, published articles on finance, and campaigned for shareholder rights. The SEC claimed that Mr. Wanger overcharged his clients by exactly $2,269, about $70 per month – possibly the smallest case the SEC has ever undertaken. No charges were ever filed against Mr. Wanger, and no hearings or trial were held. He never pleaded guilty or admitted to breaking any laws. The SEC instead, instituted administrative proceedings which forced Mr. Wanger to shut down his business and layoff his employees, and has since barred him from practicing his profession.

You can also read more about Mr. Wanger’s story on his blog at https://2200dollarman.org.

Featuring:
- Michael Kelly, Partner, Hogan Lovells U.S. LLP
- Eric Wanger, Founder, Wanger Investment Management

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>http://www.fed-soc.org/library/audiolib/20170628_FreeLunchPodcastE2.mp3Thu, 22 Jun 2017 19:56:47 +0000The Federalist SocietyIn many federal investigations, a regulatory agency must bring legal action against a company or individual through the traditional court system. However, some regulatory agencies, like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), have a powerful...
Take for instance, the case of Eric Wanger. In 2010, Mr. Wanger ran a multi-family office, employed 11 people, published articles on finance, and campaigned for shareholder rights. The SEC claimed that Mr. Wanger overcharged his clients by exactly $2,269, about $70 per month – possibly the smallest case the SEC has ever undertaken. No charges were ever filed against Mr. Wanger, and no hearings or trial were held. He never pleaded guilty or admitted to breaking any laws. The SEC instead, instituted administrative proceedings which forced Mr. Wanger to shut down his business and layoff his employees, and has since barred him from practicing his profession.

You can also read more about Mr. Wanger’s story on his blog at https://2200dollarman.org.

Featuring:
- Michael Kelly, Partner, Hogan Lovells U.S. LLP
- Eric Wanger, Founder, Wanger Investment Management

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3607cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/regulatory-transparency-project-what-and
The Regulatory Transparency Project promotes a national conversation about the benefits and costs of federal, state, and local regulatory policies and explores areas for possible improvement.

Featuring:
- Amb. C. Boyden Gray, Founding Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates
- Devon Westhill, Founding Director, Regulatory Transparency Project

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>http://www.fed-soc.org/library/audioLib/20170609_FreeLunchPodcastE1.mp3Fri, 09 Jun 2017 21:18:17 +0000The Federalist SocietyWe have grown accustomed to modern government issuing and enforcing new rules to protect certain public goods, but regulations also have the potential to stifle innovation and harm the most vulnerable among us. Therefore, we must be diligent in...
The Regulatory Transparency Project promotes a national conversation about the benefits and costs of federal, state, and local regulatory policies and explores areas for possible improvement.

Featuring:
- Amb. C. Boyden Gray, Founding Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates
- Devon Westhill, Founding Director, Regulatory Transparency Project

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>3769cleanfullhttps://www.spreaker.com/user/fedsoc/introduction
Listen to future episodes of the Fourth Branch Podcast (https://regproject.org/podcast/) to hear leading experts discuss the merits of government rules that affect your daily lives.

Featuring:
- Devon Westhill, Founding Director, Regulatory Transparency Project

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>http://www.fed-soc.org/library/audioLib/20170609_FreeLunchPodcastE0.wavFri, 09 Jun 2017 21:12:00 +0000The Federalist SocietyDevon Westhill introduces and describes the Regulatory Transparency Project's podcast series. Listen to future episodes of the Fourth Branch Podcast (https://regproject.org/podcast/) to hear leading experts discuss the merits of government rules that...
Listen to future episodes of the Fourth Branch Podcast (https://regproject.org/podcast/) to hear leading experts discuss the merits of government rules that affect your daily lives.

Featuring:
- Devon Westhill, Founding Director, Regulatory Transparency Project

Visit our website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.]]>139cleanfull