<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:podcast="https://podcastindex.org/namespace/1.0" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" version="2.0"><channel><title>The Freedom of Thought Podcast</title><link>https://freedomofthought.fedsoc.org/</link><description><![CDATA[The Freedom of Thought Podcast: An opportunity to explore the people behind the books, articles, arguments, and events that contribute to the law and public discourse. We interview the scholars and attorneys bringing fresh thinking to new challenges and questions, and ask: what makes you different? What are the convictions behind your engagement on controversial questions? How has your work shaped your thinking, and how have your ideas evolved? What have you learned about the value of freedom of thought?]]></description><atom:link href="https://www.spreaker.com/show/5741169/episodes/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><language>en</language><category>Politics</category><copyright>Copyright The Federalist Society</copyright><lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2025 20:39:52 +0000</lastBuildDate><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:owner><itunes:name>The Federalist Society</itunes:name><itunes:email>fot@fedsoc.org</itunes:email></itunes:owner><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:subtitle>The Freedom of Thought Podcast: An opportunity to explore the people behind the books, articles, arguments, and events that contribute to the law and public discourse. We interview the scholars and attorneys bringing fresh thinking to new challenges...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[The Freedom of Thought Podcast: An opportunity to explore the people behind the books, articles, arguments, and events that contribute to the law and public discourse. We interview the scholars and attorneys bringing fresh thinking to new challenges and questions, and ask: what makes you different? What are the convictions behind your engagement on controversial questions? How has your work shaped your thinking, and how have your ideas evolved? What have you learned about the value of freedom of thought?]]></itunes:summary><itunes:category text="News"><itunes:category text="Politics"/></itunes:category><itunes:category text="News"/><itunes:category text="News"><itunes:category text="News Commentary"/></itunes:category><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:type>episodic</itunes:type><item><title>Frozen Out: Debanking Practice and Policy in the New Administration</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/frozen-out-debanking-practice-and-policy-in-the-new-administration--64005801</link><description><![CDATA[Financial institutions have faced growing scrutiny for debanking customers, with no explanation. While debanking is sometimes legally necessary when banks suspect unlawful conduct, recent reports have prompted high-profile questions about the practice, including from the President himself.<br /> <br />The lack of transparency does not help. How do financial institutions determine which accounts or services will be closed? Are these decisions driven by regulatory sensitivities, perceived reputational risk, or other considerations? Should legal limits exist on financial institutions' discretion to debank? What are the rights of corporations to choose what customers to serve and what, if any, limits might apply in an industry as heavily-regulated and protected as banks? What can be done to protect citizens' rights to participate in public discourse without fear of financial exclusion?<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Nicholas Anthony, </b>Policy Analyst, Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives, Cato Institute<br /><b>Hon. Rohit Chopra,</b> Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau<br /><b>Will Hild, </b>Executive Director, Consumers’ Research<br /><b>Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, </b>George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University<br /><b><i>Moderator:</i> Megan McArdle,</b> Columnist, Washington Post]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/64005801</guid><pubDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2025 18:04:25 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/64005801/php3pkrno.mp3" length="213003136" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/8a37d7a0-e59b-46d1-9c12-cf9acea946d2/8a37d7a0-e59b-46d1-9c12-cf9acea946d2.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/8a37d7a0-e59b-46d1-9c12-cf9acea946d2/8a37d7a0-e59b-46d1-9c12-cf9acea946d2.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/8a37d7a0-e59b-46d1-9c12-cf9acea946d2/8a37d7a0-e59b-46d1-9c12-cf9acea946d2.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>Financial institutions have faced growing scrutiny for debanking customers, with no explanation. While debanking is sometimes legally necessary when banks suspect unlawful conduct, recent reports have prompted high-profile questions about the...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[Financial institutions have faced growing scrutiny for debanking customers, with no explanation. While debanking is sometimes legally necessary when banks suspect unlawful conduct, recent reports have prompted high-profile questions about the practice, including from the President himself.<br /> <br />The lack of transparency does not help. How do financial institutions determine which accounts or services will be closed? Are these decisions driven by regulatory sensitivities, perceived reputational risk, or other considerations? Should legal limits exist on financial institutions' discretion to debank? What are the rights of corporations to choose what customers to serve and what, if any, limits might apply in an industry as heavily-regulated and protected as banks? What can be done to protect citizens' rights to participate in public discourse without fear of financial exclusion?<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Nicholas Anthony, </b>Policy Analyst, Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives, Cato Institute<br /><b>Hon. Rohit Chopra,</b> Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau<br /><b>Will Hild, </b>Executive Director, Consumers’ Research<br /><b>Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, </b>George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University<br /><b><i>Moderator:</i> Megan McArdle,</b> Columnist, Washington Post]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>5325</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Open Minds with Prof. Richard Epstein and Prof. Todd Zywicki - Part I</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/open-minds-with-prof-richard-epstein-and-prof-todd-zywicki-part-i--63717821</link><description><![CDATA[Prof. Richard Epstein joins Prof. Todd Zywicki to discuss his academic journey, where he learned early on, particularly through the lens of Roman law, that legal issues cannot be understood by mere definitions, but by understanding deeper substantive theory. Prof. Epstein emphasizes valuable lessons he learned along the way, such as the importance of figuring out where one’s particular strengths lie and how to “do” law by oneself. How does one transition from a dutiful student to a sui generis thinker? Join us for an engaging discussion on Prof. Epstein’s evolution of academic thought and the adaptation of Roman law and early English common law to the world around us.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Prof. Richard A. Epstein, </b>Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law<br /><b>Prof. Todd J. Zywicki,</b> George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/63717821</guid><pubDate>Thu, 16 Jan 2025 20:46:06 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/63717821/phpiwey2e.mp3" length="43708928" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/251d17b2-1d3c-4ab5-b945-6d989c7782e4/251d17b2-1d3c-4ab5-b945-6d989c7782e4.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/251d17b2-1d3c-4ab5-b945-6d989c7782e4/251d17b2-1d3c-4ab5-b945-6d989c7782e4.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/251d17b2-1d3c-4ab5-b945-6d989c7782e4/251d17b2-1d3c-4ab5-b945-6d989c7782e4.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>Prof. Richard Epstein joins Prof. Todd Zywicki to discuss his academic journey, where he learned early on, particularly through the lens of Roman law, that legal issues cannot be understood by mere definitions, but by understanding deeper substantive...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[Prof. Richard Epstein joins Prof. Todd Zywicki to discuss his academic journey, where he learned early on, particularly through the lens of Roman law, that legal issues cannot be understood by mere definitions, but by understanding deeper substantive theory. Prof. Epstein emphasizes valuable lessons he learned along the way, such as the importance of figuring out where one’s particular strengths lie and how to “do” law by oneself. How does one transition from a dutiful student to a sui generis thinker? Join us for an engaging discussion on Prof. Epstein’s evolution of academic thought and the adaptation of Roman law and early English common law to the world around us.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Prof. Richard A. Epstein, </b>Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law<br /><b>Prof. Todd J. Zywicki,</b> George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>2732</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Panel: Preserving Judicial Independence in a Time of Political Division</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/panel-preserving-judicial-independence-in-a-time-of-political-division--63148618</link><description><![CDATA[At this Freedom of Thought Project event, panelists will discuss the current political landscape in the U.S. and how rhetoric from political leaders impacts our judiciary, society, and our freedoms.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>James Burnham,</b> President, Vallecito Capital<br /><b>Jay Edelson, </b>Founder &amp; CEO, Edelson PC<br /><b>Prof. Nicole Stelle Garnett,</b> John P. Murphy Foundation Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame Law School<br /><b><i>Moderator:</i> Megan McArdle,</b> Columnist, Washington Post<br /><br />And later featuring:<br /><br /><b>T. Elliot Gaiser,</b> Solicitor General, Ohio<br /><b>Eric Wessan,</b> Solicitor General, Iowa<br /><b><i>Moderator:</i> Megan McArdle,</b> Columnist, Washington Post]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/63148618</guid><pubDate>Thu, 05 Dec 2024 16:00:08 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/63148618/phpgpljck.mp3" length="61413370" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/5d2ae212-4cb9-4b1c-a6a7-bbabf5e273ec/5d2ae212-4cb9-4b1c-a6a7-bbabf5e273ec.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/5d2ae212-4cb9-4b1c-a6a7-bbabf5e273ec/5d2ae212-4cb9-4b1c-a6a7-bbabf5e273ec.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/5d2ae212-4cb9-4b1c-a6a7-bbabf5e273ec/5d2ae212-4cb9-4b1c-a6a7-bbabf5e273ec.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>At this Freedom of Thought Project event, panelists will discuss the current political landscape in the U.S. and how rhetoric from political leaders impacts our judiciary, society, and our freedoms.

Featuring:

James Burnham, President, Vallecito...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[At this Freedom of Thought Project event, panelists will discuss the current political landscape in the U.S. and how rhetoric from political leaders impacts our judiciary, society, and our freedoms.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>James Burnham,</b> President, Vallecito Capital<br /><b>Jay Edelson, </b>Founder &amp; CEO, Edelson PC<br /><b>Prof. Nicole Stelle Garnett,</b> John P. Murphy Foundation Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame Law School<br /><b><i>Moderator:</i> Megan McArdle,</b> Columnist, Washington Post<br /><br />And later featuring:<br /><br /><b>T. Elliot Gaiser,</b> Solicitor General, Ohio<br /><b>Eric Wessan,</b> Solicitor General, Iowa<br /><b><i>Moderator:</i> Megan McArdle,</b> Columnist, Washington Post]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>3839</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Fireside Chat with Solicitors General T. Elliot Gaiser and Eric Wessan</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/fireside-chat-with-solicitors-general-t-elliot-gaiser-and-eric-wessan--63018744</link><description><![CDATA[At this Freedom of Thought Project event, panelists will discuss the current political landscape in the U.S. and how rhetoric from political leaders impacts our judiciary, society, and our freedoms.<br /><br /><b><i>Featuring:</i></b><br /><br /><b>T. Elliot Gaiser, </b>Solicitor General, Ohio<br /><b>Eric Wessan,</b> Solicitor General, Iowa<br /><b><i>Moderator: </i>Megan McArdle,</b> Columnist, Washington Post]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/63018744</guid><pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2024 22:16:06 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/63018744/php9jsjgi.mp3" length="47690934" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/deffc291-cd8a-4e6a-8760-5e43651a26b0/deffc291-cd8a-4e6a-8760-5e43651a26b0.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/deffc291-cd8a-4e6a-8760-5e43651a26b0/deffc291-cd8a-4e6a-8760-5e43651a26b0.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/deffc291-cd8a-4e6a-8760-5e43651a26b0/deffc291-cd8a-4e6a-8760-5e43651a26b0.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>At this Freedom of Thought Project event, panelists will discuss the current political landscape in the U.S. and how rhetoric from political leaders impacts our judiciary, society, and our freedoms.

Featuring:

T. Elliot Gaiser, Solicitor General,...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[At this Freedom of Thought Project event, panelists will discuss the current political landscape in the U.S. and how rhetoric from political leaders impacts our judiciary, society, and our freedoms.<br /><br /><b><i>Featuring:</i></b><br /><br /><b>T. Elliot Gaiser, </b>Solicitor General, Ohio<br /><b>Eric Wessan,</b> Solicitor General, Iowa<br /><b><i>Moderator: </i>Megan McArdle,</b> Columnist, Washington Post]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>2981</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Open Minds with Prof. Julia Mahoney and Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld - Part II</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/open-minds-with-prof-julia-mahoney-and-prof-joshua-kleinfeld-part-ii--61389956</link><description><![CDATA[In Part 2, Professor Julia Mahoney joins Professor Joshua Kleinfeld to discuss freedom of thought in diverse professional worlds, from universities to law to corporations to medicine. Why have professional sectors become more ideological? Has concentration in the for-profit sector contributed to this development, and what are some possible solutions? What obligations do shareholders have to their employees? Join us for a conversation on market competition, government regulation, and more.<br />Featuring:<br /><br />Prof. Julia Mahoney, John S. Battle Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law<br />Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld, Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/61389956</guid><pubDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2024 17:41:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/61389956/phpcxnjos.mp3" length="72448346" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/a305d679-9af7-4b8e-b6a7-bec7db49d33b/a305d679-9af7-4b8e-b6a7-bec7db49d33b.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/a305d679-9af7-4b8e-b6a7-bec7db49d33b/a305d679-9af7-4b8e-b6a7-bec7db49d33b.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/a305d679-9af7-4b8e-b6a7-bec7db49d33b/a305d679-9af7-4b8e-b6a7-bec7db49d33b.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>In Part 2, Professor Julia Mahoney joins Professor Joshua Kleinfeld to discuss freedom of thought in diverse professional worlds, from universities to law to corporations to medicine. Why have professional sectors become more ideological? Has...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[In Part 2, Professor Julia Mahoney joins Professor Joshua Kleinfeld to discuss freedom of thought in diverse professional worlds, from universities to law to corporations to medicine. Why have professional sectors become more ideological? Has concentration in the for-profit sector contributed to this development, and what are some possible solutions? What obligations do shareholders have to their employees? Join us for a conversation on market competition, government regulation, and more.<br />Featuring:<br /><br />Prof. Julia Mahoney, John S. Battle Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law<br />Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld, Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>4528</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:season>2</itunes:season><itunes:episode>7</itunes:episode><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Open Minds with Prof. Julia Mahoney and Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld - Part I</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/open-minds-with-prof-julia-mahoney-and-prof-joshua-kleinfeld-part-i--61252015</link><description><![CDATA[In Part I, Professor Julia Mahoney joins Professor Joshua Kleinfeld to delve into the complexities of governmental regulation and market power. What makes markets possible? How do institutions enable people to cooperate in a productive way? In what ways can they prohibit people from doing so? Tune in for a conversation on private power, free markets, crony capitalism, and more.<br />Featuring:<br /><br />Prof. Julia Mahoney, John S. Battle Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law<br />Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld, Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/61252015</guid><pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 2024 14:36:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/61252015/phpkgxue5.mp3" length="61718497" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/cb93b398-85fc-4c43-969b-0a5162454ced/cb93b398-85fc-4c43-969b-0a5162454ced.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/cb93b398-85fc-4c43-969b-0a5162454ced/cb93b398-85fc-4c43-969b-0a5162454ced.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/cb93b398-85fc-4c43-969b-0a5162454ced/cb93b398-85fc-4c43-969b-0a5162454ced.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>In Part I, Professor Julia Mahoney joins Professor Joshua Kleinfeld to delve into the complexities of governmental regulation and market power. What makes markets possible? How do institutions enable people to cooperate in a productive way? In what...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[In Part I, Professor Julia Mahoney joins Professor Joshua Kleinfeld to delve into the complexities of governmental regulation and market power. What makes markets possible? How do institutions enable people to cooperate in a productive way? In what ways can they prohibit people from doing so? Tune in for a conversation on private power, free markets, crony capitalism, and more.<br />Featuring:<br /><br />Prof. Julia Mahoney, John S. Battle Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law<br />Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld, Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>3858</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:season>2</itunes:season><itunes:episode>6</itunes:episode><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>2024 Freedom of Thought Conference: Luncheon Fireside Chat with Hon. Andrew Ferguson and Hon. Paul B. Matey</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/2024-freedom-of-thought-conference-luncheon-fireside-chat-with-hon-andrew-ferguson-and-hon-paul-b-matey--60593392</link><description><![CDATA[<i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><i><b></b></i><br /><b>Hon. Andrew Ferguson, </b>Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission<br /><b><i>Moderator:</i> Hon. Paul B. Matey</b>, U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/60593392</guid><pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2024 21:25:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/60593392/phpb52gyn.mp3" length="50329754" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/69ca02dd-2efb-4145-bc19-3c9d7b287684/69ca02dd-2efb-4145-bc19-3c9d7b287684.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/69ca02dd-2efb-4145-bc19-3c9d7b287684/69ca02dd-2efb-4145-bc19-3c9d7b287684.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/69ca02dd-2efb-4145-bc19-3c9d7b287684/69ca02dd-2efb-4145-bc19-3c9d7b287684.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>Featuring:

Hon. Andrew Ferguson, Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission
Moderator: Hon. Paul B. Matey, U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[<i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><i><b></b></i><br /><b>Hon. Andrew Ferguson, </b>Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission<br /><b><i>Moderator:</i> Hon. Paul B. Matey</b>, U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>3145</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>2024 Freedom of Thought Conference: Panel 3 - Securing the Rights of a Free People</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/2024-freedom-of-thought-conference-panel-3-securing-the-rights-of-a-free-people--60593320</link><description><![CDATA[What responsibility do states have in protecting the rights of their citizens? How should we think about rights like the freedom of speech — do rights operate primarily as a limit on government power, or do they protect the natural rights of the citizen? Which framework is more consistent with original understanding? What limits applied to freedoms of speech — to what extent were they regulable by government and for what ends? How were rights defended and enforced?<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Prof. Randy Barnett,</b> Patrick Hotung Professor of Constitutional Law, Georgetown University Law Center<br /><b>Hon. Rohit Chopra,</b> Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau<br /><b>Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld,</b> Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law<br /><b>Prof. Maimon Schwarzschild,</b> Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law<br /><b>Jonathan Urick,</b> Associate Chief Counsel, U.S. Chamber of Commerce Litigation Center<br /><b><i>Moderator: </i>Hon. Kyle Duncan, </b>U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/60593320</guid><pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2024 21:10:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/60593320/php43xtqi.mp3" length="95187340" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/51c936e4-8c45-4dee-9e38-45514a6fc1a9/51c936e4-8c45-4dee-9e38-45514a6fc1a9.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/51c936e4-8c45-4dee-9e38-45514a6fc1a9/51c936e4-8c45-4dee-9e38-45514a6fc1a9.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/51c936e4-8c45-4dee-9e38-45514a6fc1a9/51c936e4-8c45-4dee-9e38-45514a6fc1a9.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>What responsibility do states have in protecting the rights of their citizens? How should we think about rights like the freedom of speech — do rights operate primarily as a limit on government power, or do they protect the natural rights of the...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[What responsibility do states have in protecting the rights of their citizens? How should we think about rights like the freedom of speech — do rights operate primarily as a limit on government power, or do they protect the natural rights of the citizen? Which framework is more consistent with original understanding? What limits applied to freedoms of speech — to what extent were they regulable by government and for what ends? How were rights defended and enforced?<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Prof. Randy Barnett,</b> Patrick Hotung Professor of Constitutional Law, Georgetown University Law Center<br /><b>Hon. Rohit Chopra,</b> Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau<br /><b>Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld,</b> Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law<br /><b>Prof. Maimon Schwarzschild,</b> Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law<br /><b>Jonathan Urick,</b> Associate Chief Counsel, U.S. Chamber of Commerce Litigation Center<br /><b><i>Moderator: </i>Hon. Kyle Duncan, </b>U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>5949</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>2024 Freedom of Thought Conference: Panel 2 - The Challenge of Citizens United</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/2024-freedom-of-thought-conference-panel-2-the-challenge-of-citizens-united--60593241</link><description><![CDATA[How did corporate rights evolve to include expressive constitutional rights akin to those of a natural person? How should we think about constitutional protections for corporate speech promoting commercial interests? Should the degree of alignment between ownership and control affect the constitutional interests of the corporation? Does SEC regulation on shareholder voting interfere with shareholders’ constitutional rights? If substantive rights like freedom of speech operate primarily as limits on government, does it matter whose rights are being protected?<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>John Ehrett, </b>Chief Counsel, U.S. Senator Josh Hawley<br /><b>Prof. Robert Miller,</b> F. Arnold Daum Chair in Corporate Finance and Law, University of Iowa College of Law<br /><b>Matt Stoller, </b>Director of Research, American Economic Liberties Project<br /><b>Eric Wessan, </b>Solicitor General, Iowa Office of the Attorney General<br /><b><i>Moderator:</i> Hon. Gregory G. Katsas, </b>U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/60593241</guid><pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2024 21:05:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/60593241/phprzlx6c.mp3" length="87080765" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/44028483-a13b-4b6d-83ea-ab0faab92ed0/44028483-a13b-4b6d-83ea-ab0faab92ed0.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/44028483-a13b-4b6d-83ea-ab0faab92ed0/44028483-a13b-4b6d-83ea-ab0faab92ed0.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/44028483-a13b-4b6d-83ea-ab0faab92ed0/44028483-a13b-4b6d-83ea-ab0faab92ed0.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>How did corporate rights evolve to include expressive constitutional rights akin to those of a natural person? How should we think about constitutional protections for corporate speech promoting commercial interests? Should the degree of alignment...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[How did corporate rights evolve to include expressive constitutional rights akin to those of a natural person? How should we think about constitutional protections for corporate speech promoting commercial interests? Should the degree of alignment between ownership and control affect the constitutional interests of the corporation? Does SEC regulation on shareholder voting interfere with shareholders’ constitutional rights? If substantive rights like freedom of speech operate primarily as limits on government, does it matter whose rights are being protected?<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>John Ehrett, </b>Chief Counsel, U.S. Senator Josh Hawley<br /><b>Prof. Robert Miller,</b> F. Arnold Daum Chair in Corporate Finance and Law, University of Iowa College of Law<br /><b>Matt Stoller, </b>Director of Research, American Economic Liberties Project<br /><b>Eric Wessan, </b>Solicitor General, Iowa Office of the Attorney General<br /><b><i>Moderator:</i> Hon. Gregory G. Katsas, </b>U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>5442</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>2024 Freedom of Thought Conference: Panel 1 - Did James Madison Think Corporations Were People Too?</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/2024-freedom-of-thought-conference-panel-1-did-james-madison-think-corporations-were-people-too--60593224</link><description><![CDATA[How did citizens understand corporate power at the Founding? What were the rights, privileges, and limits on corporations, and how did the rights of corporations compare to those of individual citizens? Should the fact that significant elements of the corporation–including their creation and ability to operate across state lines–were privileges granted by the state affect our thinking on corporate rights? And how does contemporary thinking about corporate rights align with founding-era understandings?<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Prof. Julia Mahoney, </b>John S. Battle Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law<br /><b>Hon. Doha Mekki,</b> Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice<br /><b>Ryan Newman, </b>General Counsel, Executive Office of the Governor, State of Florida<br /><b>Lael Weinberger,</b> Fellow, Constitutional Law Center, Stanford Law School<br /><b><i>Moderator: </i>Hon. Julius "Jay" Richardson,</b> U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/60593224</guid><pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2024 21:00:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/60593224/phppiolpd.mp3" length="87280836" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/25c4dbb1-1810-4eb1-8776-393345cdb741/25c4dbb1-1810-4eb1-8776-393345cdb741.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/25c4dbb1-1810-4eb1-8776-393345cdb741/25c4dbb1-1810-4eb1-8776-393345cdb741.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/25c4dbb1-1810-4eb1-8776-393345cdb741/25c4dbb1-1810-4eb1-8776-393345cdb741.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>How did citizens understand corporate power at the Founding? What were the rights, privileges, and limits on corporations, and how did the rights of corporations compare to those of individual citizens? Should the fact that significant elements of the...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[How did citizens understand corporate power at the Founding? What were the rights, privileges, and limits on corporations, and how did the rights of corporations compare to those of individual citizens? Should the fact that significant elements of the corporation–including their creation and ability to operate across state lines–were privileges granted by the state affect our thinking on corporate rights? And how does contemporary thinking about corporate rights align with founding-era understandings?<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Prof. Julia Mahoney, </b>John S. Battle Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law<br /><b>Hon. Doha Mekki,</b> Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice<br /><b>Ryan Newman, </b>General Counsel, Executive Office of the Governor, State of Florida<br /><b>Lael Weinberger,</b> Fellow, Constitutional Law Center, Stanford Law School<br /><b><i>Moderator: </i>Hon. Julius "Jay" Richardson,</b> U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>5455</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>2024 Freedom of Thought Conference: Panel 4 - The NetChoice Problem</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/2024-freedom-of-thought-conference-panel-4-the-netchoice-problem--61392249</link><description><![CDATA[We know how to think about government coercion. We have ready and familiar frameworks for evaluating how government power should be exercised against the private individual. But courts and policymakers increasingly are called to mediate between private actors with competing claims to liberty, and the analysis is perhaps more complex and uncertain. How should we evaluate such competing claims and what are the self-governance interests of citizens themselves? Do we have a good framework for resolving conflicting interests of corporations and natural citizens, and what role or responsibility does the state have in resolving those disputes?<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Jonathan Berry,</b> Managing Partner, Boyden Gray PLLC<br /><b>James Burnham,</b> President, Vallecito Capital, LLC<br /><b>Erin Hawley,</b> Senior Counsel, Alliance Defending Freedom<br /><b>Casey Mattox, </b>Vice President, Legal Strategy, Stand Together<br /><b>Prof. Todd Zywicki, </b>George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University<br /><b><i>Moderator:</i> Hon. Trevor N. McFadden,</b> U.S. District Court, District of Columbia]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/61392249</guid><pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2024 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/61392249/phphvta6u.mp3" length="102052812" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/155af09d-0b7e-47f9-89c7-375aa8a11037/155af09d-0b7e-47f9-89c7-375aa8a11037.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/155af09d-0b7e-47f9-89c7-375aa8a11037/155af09d-0b7e-47f9-89c7-375aa8a11037.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/155af09d-0b7e-47f9-89c7-375aa8a11037/155af09d-0b7e-47f9-89c7-375aa8a11037.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>We know how to think about government coercion. We have ready and familiar frameworks for evaluating how government power should be exercised against the private individual. But courts and policymakers increasingly are called to mediate between...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[We know how to think about government coercion. We have ready and familiar frameworks for evaluating how government power should be exercised against the private individual. But courts and policymakers increasingly are called to mediate between private actors with competing claims to liberty, and the analysis is perhaps more complex and uncertain. How should we evaluate such competing claims and what are the self-governance interests of citizens themselves? Do we have a good framework for resolving conflicting interests of corporations and natural citizens, and what role or responsibility does the state have in resolving those disputes?<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Jonathan Berry,</b> Managing Partner, Boyden Gray PLLC<br /><b>James Burnham,</b> President, Vallecito Capital, LLC<br /><b>Erin Hawley,</b> Senior Counsel, Alliance Defending Freedom<br /><b>Casey Mattox, </b>Vice President, Legal Strategy, Stand Together<br /><b>Prof. Todd Zywicki, </b>George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University<br /><b><i>Moderator:</i> Hon. Trevor N. McFadden,</b> U.S. District Court, District of Columbia]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>6379</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Open Minds with Andrew Ferguson and James Burnham</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/open-minds-with-andrew-ferguson-and-james-burnham--61273485</link><description><![CDATA[In this episode of Open Minds, Andrew Ferguson discusses his career, from judicial clerkships to the Hill to state government, and how the mentors and friends he made along the way helped shape his career and intellectual development.<br /><br />Andrew Ferguson and James Burnham then turn to the questions of the moment. What role can state solicitors general play in curtailing government overreach? What is antitrust law? How did a bipartisan consensus on antitrust doctrine develop? How well does it align with original understanding of older antitrust statutes? And where might antitrust thinking be headed next?<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Andrew N. Ferguson,</b> Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission<br /><b>James M. Burnham,</b> President, Vallecito Capital, LLC]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/61273485</guid><pubDate>Mon, 17 Jun 2024 14:03:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/61273485/phpn2ochn.mp3" length="68124976" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/35f67764-15d6-4da7-8eac-d58053491fc5/35f67764-15d6-4da7-8eac-d58053491fc5.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/35f67764-15d6-4da7-8eac-d58053491fc5/35f67764-15d6-4da7-8eac-d58053491fc5.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/35f67764-15d6-4da7-8eac-d58053491fc5/35f67764-15d6-4da7-8eac-d58053491fc5.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>In this episode of Open Minds, Andrew Ferguson discusses his career, from judicial clerkships to the Hill to state government, and how the mentors and friends he made along the way helped shape his career and intellectual development.

Andrew Ferguson...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[In this episode of Open Minds, Andrew Ferguson discusses his career, from judicial clerkships to the Hill to state government, and how the mentors and friends he made along the way helped shape his career and intellectual development.<br /><br />Andrew Ferguson and James Burnham then turn to the questions of the moment. What role can state solicitors general play in curtailing government overreach? What is antitrust law? How did a bipartisan consensus on antitrust doctrine develop? How well does it align with original understanding of older antitrust statutes? And where might antitrust thinking be headed next?<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Andrew N. Ferguson,</b> Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission<br /><b>James M. Burnham,</b> President, Vallecito Capital, LLC]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>4258</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:season>2</itunes:season><itunes:episode>5</itunes:episode><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Open Minds: Concentrated Control, Acceptable Opinions, and Corporate Influence - Part II</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/open-minds-concentrated-control-acceptable-opinions-and-corporate-influence-part-ii--60389774</link><description><![CDATA[In Part 2 of Open Minds with Ryan Newman, we discuss government and private coercion and how state plenary authority plays into questions of freedom. How does concentrated economic and government power affect the democratic power of private citizens? How does a corporation's size and scale change its ability to exercise political influence? And how can conservative and libertarian discussions shift from focusing on process and procedure to inspiring substantive change?<br />Featuring:<br /><br /><b>Ryan Newman, </b>General Counsel, Executive Office of the Governor, State of Florida<br /><b>Alida Kass, </b>Vice President &amp; Director, Strategic Initiatives and Freedom of Thought Project, The Federalist Society]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/60389774</guid><pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2024 21:18:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/60389774/phpazefge.mp3" length="41242158" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/25b3b4bf-8b0f-48be-808c-470a9752dd73/25b3b4bf-8b0f-48be-808c-470a9752dd73.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/25b3b4bf-8b0f-48be-808c-470a9752dd73/25b3b4bf-8b0f-48be-808c-470a9752dd73.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/25b3b4bf-8b0f-48be-808c-470a9752dd73/25b3b4bf-8b0f-48be-808c-470a9752dd73.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>In Part 2 of Open Minds with Ryan Newman, we discuss government and private coercion and how state plenary authority plays into questions of freedom. How does concentrated economic and government power affect the democratic power of private citizens?...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[In Part 2 of Open Minds with Ryan Newman, we discuss government and private coercion and how state plenary authority plays into questions of freedom. How does concentrated economic and government power affect the democratic power of private citizens? How does a corporation's size and scale change its ability to exercise political influence? And how can conservative and libertarian discussions shift from focusing on process and procedure to inspiring substantive change?<br />Featuring:<br /><br /><b>Ryan Newman, </b>General Counsel, Executive Office of the Governor, State of Florida<br /><b>Alida Kass, </b>Vice President &amp; Director, Strategic Initiatives and Freedom of Thought Project, The Federalist Society]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>2578</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:season>2</itunes:season><itunes:episode>4</itunes:episode><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Open Minds: A New Approach for Putting Conservativism into Practice Part I</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/open-minds-a-new-approach-for-putting-conservativism-into-practice-part-i--61085127</link><description><![CDATA[Part 1 of Open Minds with Ryan Newman covers how his upbringing in the American southwest and his less conventional career, including military service, as well as judicial clerkships, and service in both state and federal government, shaped his life and thought. What does it mean to fight for what you believe in? What grounds our rights, and are there limits to those rights? How do political leaders balance our competing interests in national crises?<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Ryan Newman, </b>General Counsel, Executive Office of the Governor, State of Florida<br /><b>Alida Kass, </b>Vice President &amp; Director, Strategic Initiatives and Freedom of Thought Project, The Federalist Society]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/61085127</guid><pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2024 20:35:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/61085127/phpnb6wim.mp3" length="40756863" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/ee8fa78c-8ad2-4bc6-830f-0c230a3ed593/ee8fa78c-8ad2-4bc6-830f-0c230a3ed593.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/ee8fa78c-8ad2-4bc6-830f-0c230a3ed593/ee8fa78c-8ad2-4bc6-830f-0c230a3ed593.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/starship/ee8fa78c-8ad2-4bc6-830f-0c230a3ed593/ee8fa78c-8ad2-4bc6-830f-0c230a3ed593.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>Part 1 of Open Minds with Ryan Newman covers how his upbringing in the American southwest and his less conventional career, including military service, as well as judicial clerkships, and service in both state and federal government, shaped his life...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[Part 1 of Open Minds with Ryan Newman covers how his upbringing in the American southwest and his less conventional career, including military service, as well as judicial clerkships, and service in both state and federal government, shaped his life and thought. What does it mean to fight for what you believe in? What grounds our rights, and are there limits to those rights? How do political leaders balance our competing interests in national crises?<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Ryan Newman, </b>General Counsel, Executive Office of the Governor, State of Florida<br /><b>Alida Kass, </b>Vice President &amp; Director, Strategic Initiatives and Freedom of Thought Project, The Federalist Society]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>2547</itunes:duration><itunes:keywords>corporations,federalist society,securities &amp; antitrust</itunes:keywords><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:season>2</itunes:season><itunes:episode>3</itunes:episode><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>NetChoice and Murthy: Speech and Coercion in the Digital Age</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/netchoice-and-murthy-speech-and-coercion-in-the-digital-age--60188912</link><description><![CDATA[What can state actors do to protect or interfere with online public discourse? The recent argument in National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo suggests that there is some outer limit of government coercion on private actors to interfere with disfavored ideas. But questions from the bench in Murthy v. Missouri, argued the same morning, have some wondering if those limits might allow for significant “informal” pressure by government actors on platform operators to restrict user speech.<br />Together, the cases highlight the significance of the NetChoice cases heard last month. Can laws like those adopted in Texas and Florida create counter-pressure against coercion from the federal government? What responsibility do states have in protecting their own citizens’ participation in online public discourse?<br />Featuring:<br /><br />Alan Gura, Vice President for Litigation, Institute for Free Speech<br />Prof. Julia D. Mahoney, John S. Battle Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law<br />Matt Stoller, Director of Research, American Economic Liberties Project<br />Moderator: Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/60188912</guid><pubDate>Tue, 09 Apr 2024 16:31:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/60188912/phpijfn64.mp3" length="74896602" type="audio/mpeg"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>What can state actors do to protect or interfere with online public discourse? The recent argument in National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo suggests that there is some outer limit of government coercion on private actors to interfere with...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[What can state actors do to protect or interfere with online public discourse? The recent argument in National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo suggests that there is some outer limit of government coercion on private actors to interfere with disfavored ideas. But questions from the bench in Murthy v. Missouri, argued the same morning, have some wondering if those limits might allow for significant “informal” pressure by government actors on platform operators to restrict user speech.<br />Together, the cases highlight the significance of the NetChoice cases heard last month. Can laws like those adopted in Texas and Florida create counter-pressure against coercion from the federal government? What responsibility do states have in protecting their own citizens’ participation in online public discourse?<br />Featuring:<br /><br />Alan Gura, Vice President for Litigation, Institute for Free Speech<br />Prof. Julia D. Mahoney, John S. Battle Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law<br />Matt Stoller, Director of Research, American Economic Liberties Project<br />Moderator: Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>4681</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>When Mozilla Fired Its Founder: On the 10 Year Anniversary of Brendan Eich Leaving His Company</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/when-mozilla-fired-its-founder-on-the-10-year-anniversary-of-brendan-eich-leaving-his-company--60188892</link><description><![CDATA[Co-founder of Mozilla and creator of JavaScript, Brendan Eich had made remarkable contributions to the technology sector. He also had contributed $1,000 to the (successful) Proposition 8 campaign against same-sex marriage. On April 3, 2014, Mozilla forced him out of the company he had founded, with apologies for not having acted sooner.<br />Watching it all unfold, Prof. Todd Zywicki was concerned, warning that this would not stop with financial contributions for ballot initiatives – that it was not a stable equilibrium. At least at the time, Inez Stepman was less troubled, confident that such disagreements could be resolved through market forces. Who was right? Join us for a conversation with Prof. Zywicki and Inez Stepman, as they reflect on the campaign against Brendan Eich, consider lessons learned, and discuss the implications for freedom of thought today.<br />Featuring:<br /><br />Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University<br />Inez Stepman, Senior Policy Analyst, Independent Women’s Forum]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/60188892</guid><pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2024 16:01:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/60188892/phpsiot6l.mp3" length="61771130" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/502339c7-9588-4ca0-bf01-2564e9fb41a6/502339c7-9588-4ca0-bf01-2564e9fb41a6.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/502339c7-9588-4ca0-bf01-2564e9fb41a6/502339c7-9588-4ca0-bf01-2564e9fb41a6.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/502339c7-9588-4ca0-bf01-2564e9fb41a6/502339c7-9588-4ca0-bf01-2564e9fb41a6.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>Co-founder of Mozilla and creator of JavaScript, Brendan Eich had made remarkable contributions to the technology sector. He also had contributed $1,000 to the (successful) Proposition 8 campaign against same-sex marriage. On April 3, 2014, Mozilla...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[Co-founder of Mozilla and creator of JavaScript, Brendan Eich had made remarkable contributions to the technology sector. He also had contributed $1,000 to the (successful) Proposition 8 campaign against same-sex marriage. On April 3, 2014, Mozilla forced him out of the company he had founded, with apologies for not having acted sooner.<br />Watching it all unfold, Prof. Todd Zywicki was concerned, warning that this would not stop with financial contributions for ballot initiatives – that it was not a stable equilibrium. At least at the time, Inez Stepman was less troubled, confident that such disagreements could be resolved through market forces. Who was right? Join us for a conversation with Prof. Zywicki and Inez Stepman, as they reflect on the campaign against Brendan Eich, consider lessons learned, and discuss the implications for freedom of thought today.<br />Featuring:<br /><br />Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University<br />Inez Stepman, Senior Policy Analyst, Independent Women’s Forum]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>3861</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Open Minds with Jonathan Mitchell and James Burnham - Part II</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/open-minds-with-jonathan-mitchell-and-james-burnham-part-ii--59032563</link><description><![CDATA[In the second part of this interview, James Burnham and Jonathan Mitchell discuss areas where conventional wisdom can be challenged and how he has sought to shift the Overton window in legal discourse. Should legal doctrine eclipse constitutional and statutory text? Join us for a sweeping discussion on equality doctrine, judicial review limitations, private civil enforcement, and more.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Jonathan Mitchell,</b> Principal, Mitchell Law PLLC<br /><b>James Burnham,</b> President, Vallecito Capital, LLC]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/59032563</guid><pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2024 21:52:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/59032563/phpxvbc0p.mp3" length="66391771" type="audio/mpeg"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>In the second part of this interview, James Burnham and Jonathan Mitchell discuss areas where conventional wisdom can be challenged and how he has sought to shift the Overton window in legal discourse. Should legal doctrine eclipse constitutional and...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[In the second part of this interview, James Burnham and Jonathan Mitchell discuss areas where conventional wisdom can be challenged and how he has sought to shift the Overton window in legal discourse. Should legal doctrine eclipse constitutional and statutory text? Join us for a sweeping discussion on equality doctrine, judicial review limitations, private civil enforcement, and more.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Jonathan Mitchell,</b> Principal, Mitchell Law PLLC<br /><b>James Burnham,</b> President, Vallecito Capital, LLC]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>2073</itunes:duration><itunes:keywords>federalism &amp; separation of pow,federalist society</itunes:keywords><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:season>2</itunes:season><itunes:episode>2</itunes:episode><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Open Minds with Jonathan Mitchell and James Burnham - Part I</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/open-minds-with-jonathan-mitchell-and-james-burnham-part-i--59032562</link><description><![CDATA[In the first part of this interview, James Burnham and Jonathan Mitchell discuss his unusual career progression in alternating legal practice and academia, how his experience with consequentialism informs his formalism and textualism, and what's next for the conservative legal movement.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Jonathan Mitchell,</b> Principal, Mitchell Law PLLC<br /><b>James Burnham, </b>President, Vallecito Capital, LLC]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/59032562</guid><pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2024 14:34:59 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/59032562/phpo3qhtv.mp3" length="99589666" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/07fec08a-8a14-45ba-9a0f-e72ef983dafb/07fec08a-8a14-45ba-9a0f-e72ef983dafb.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/07fec08a-8a14-45ba-9a0f-e72ef983dafb/07fec08a-8a14-45ba-9a0f-e72ef983dafb.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/07fec08a-8a14-45ba-9a0f-e72ef983dafb/07fec08a-8a14-45ba-9a0f-e72ef983dafb.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>In the first part of this interview, James Burnham and Jonathan Mitchell discuss his unusual career progression in alternating legal practice and academia, how his experience with consequentialism informs his formalism and textualism, and what's next...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[In the first part of this interview, James Burnham and Jonathan Mitchell discuss his unusual career progression in alternating legal practice and academia, how his experience with consequentialism informs his formalism and textualism, and what's next for the conservative legal movement.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Jonathan Mitchell,</b> Principal, Mitchell Law PLLC<br /><b>James Burnham, </b>President, Vallecito Capital, LLC]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>3110</itunes:duration><itunes:keywords>federalism &amp; separation of pow,federalist society</itunes:keywords><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:season>2</itunes:season><itunes:episode>1</itunes:episode><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>NetChoice and the Future of State Regulation of Big Tech</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/netchoice-and-the-future-of-state-regulation-of-big-tech--58945228</link><description><![CDATA[A panel of experts from a variety of political perspectives will discuss the range of briefing and arguments in Moody v. NetChoice, LLC and NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton. <br /> Featuring:<br /><br /> Ryan L. Bangert, Senior Vice President, Strategic Initiatives &amp;amp; Special Counsel to the President, Alliance Defending Freedom<br /> Prof. Julia D. Mahoney, John S. Battle Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law<br /> Prof. Ganesh Sitaraman, New York Alumni Chancellor's Chair in Law, Vanderbilt University Law School<br /> Prof. Zephyr Teachout, Professor of Law, Fordham Law School<br /> Moderator: James M. Burnham, President, Vallecito Capital, LLC<br />]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/58945228</guid><pubDate>Tue, 27 Feb 2024 15:00:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/58945228/phplhr8rn.mp3" length="145571640" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/088c5016-14e5-404e-906d-22d503fee3bf/088c5016-14e5-404e-906d-22d503fee3bf.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/088c5016-14e5-404e-906d-22d503fee3bf/088c5016-14e5-404e-906d-22d503fee3bf.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/088c5016-14e5-404e-906d-22d503fee3bf/088c5016-14e5-404e-906d-22d503fee3bf.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>A panel of experts from a variety of political perspectives will discuss the range of briefing and arguments in Moody v. NetChoice, LLC and NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton. &#13;
Featuring:&#13;
&#13;
Ryan L. Bangert, Senior Vice President, Strategic Initiatives &amp;amp;...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[A panel of experts from a variety of political perspectives will discuss the range of briefing and arguments in Moody v. NetChoice, LLC and NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton. <br /> Featuring:<br /><br /> Ryan L. Bangert, Senior Vice President, Strategic Initiatives &amp;amp; Special Counsel to the President, Alliance Defending Freedom<br /> Prof. Julia D. Mahoney, John S. Battle Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law<br /> Prof. Ganesh Sitaraman, New York Alumni Chancellor's Chair in Law, Vanderbilt University Law School<br /> Prof. Zephyr Teachout, Professor of Law, Fordham Law School<br /> Moderator: James M. Burnham, President, Vallecito Capital, LLC<br />]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>4549</itunes:duration><itunes:keywords>first amendment,free speech &amp; election law,telecommunications &amp; electroni</itunes:keywords><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Race at Work: Can Businesses Treat People Differently on the Basis of Race?</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/race-at-work-can-businesses-treat-people-differently-on-the-basis-of-race--58946107</link><description><![CDATA[In June of last year, the Supreme Court held that consideration of applicants&amp;rsquo; race in admissions decisions of Harvard and the University of North Carolina violated both the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution and Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.<br />But what are the implications outside of university admissions? How might this decision affect the interpretation and enforcement of federal laws against discrimination in employment, contracting, and other business practices?<br />Please join us for the first in a series of webinars, as we consider the larger implications of Students for Fair Admissions for employees and businesses.<br />On February 12th, our panelists will consider the continuing relevance of voluntary affirmative action plans under Weber and Johnson, the risks of adopting "diversity" commitments or pressuring outside contractors on diversity metrics, and newer defenses like asserted First Amendment interests in the consideration of race.<br />Featuring:<br /><br />Jason C. Schwartz, Partner, Gibson Dunn &amp;amp; Crutcher<br />Jay Edelson, Founder &amp;amp; CEO, Edelson PC<br />Stacy Hawkins, Professor of Law, Rutgers Law School<br />Jonathan Berry, Managing Partner, Boyden Gray PLLC<br />Moderator: Hon. Gregory G. Katsas, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/58946107</guid><pubDate>Mon, 12 Feb 2024 15:36:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/58946107/phpxrq783.mp3" length="151140425" type="audio/mpeg"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>In June of last year, the Supreme Court held that consideration of applicants&amp;amp;rsquo; race in admissions decisions of Harvard and the University of North Carolina violated both the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution and Title VI of the...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[In June of last year, the Supreme Court held that consideration of applicants&amp;rsquo; race in admissions decisions of Harvard and the University of North Carolina violated both the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution and Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.<br />But what are the implications outside of university admissions? How might this decision affect the interpretation and enforcement of federal laws against discrimination in employment, contracting, and other business practices?<br />Please join us for the first in a series of webinars, as we consider the larger implications of Students for Fair Admissions for employees and businesses.<br />On February 12th, our panelists will consider the continuing relevance of voluntary affirmative action plans under Weber and Johnson, the risks of adopting "diversity" commitments or pressuring outside contractors on diversity metrics, and newer defenses like asserted First Amendment interests in the consideration of race.<br />Featuring:<br /><br />Jason C. Schwartz, Partner, Gibson Dunn &amp;amp; Crutcher<br />Jay Edelson, Founder &amp;amp; CEO, Edelson PC<br />Stacy Hawkins, Professor of Law, Rutgers Law School<br />Jonathan Berry, Managing Partner, Boyden Gray PLLC<br />Moderator: Hon. Gregory G. Katsas, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>4723</itunes:duration><itunes:keywords>affirmative action,civil rights,labor &amp; employment law</itunes:keywords><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Tyranny of an Organized Minority: Free Speech Standards in Higher Education</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/tyranny-of-an-organized-minority-free-speech-standards-in-higher-education--59032240</link><description><![CDATA[This panel will consider the symmetry and consistency of free speech norms in higher education. Academic norms for free speech are essential to promote the free exchange of ideas. Students and professors must be free to engage with mutual respect while drawing a line at harassment. But has academia failed to recognize consistent speech harassment distinctions? Have there even been decisions that turned on the identities of the group involved?<br />Featuring:<br /><br />Prof. David Bernstein, University Professor of Law and Executive Director, Liberty &amp; Law Center, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University<br />Prof. Eugene Volokh, Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law<br />Jay Edelson, Founder &amp; CEO, Edelson PC<br />Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University<br />Moderator: Marcella Burke, Founder and Managing Partner of Burke Law Group PLLC]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/59032240</guid><pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2023 15:16:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/59032240/phpgiyoj2.mp3" length="140830569" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/b3337e5e-fe2c-49a8-8b6c-68c8c3eb5825/b3337e5e-fe2c-49a8-8b6c-68c8c3eb5825.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/b3337e5e-fe2c-49a8-8b6c-68c8c3eb5825/b3337e5e-fe2c-49a8-8b6c-68c8c3eb5825.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/b3337e5e-fe2c-49a8-8b6c-68c8c3eb5825/b3337e5e-fe2c-49a8-8b6c-68c8c3eb5825.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>This panel will consider the symmetry and consistency of free speech norms in higher education. Academic norms for free speech are essential to promote the free exchange of ideas. Students and professors must be free to engage with mutual respect...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[This panel will consider the symmetry and consistency of free speech norms in higher education. Academic norms for free speech are essential to promote the free exchange of ideas. Students and professors must be free to engage with mutual respect while drawing a line at harassment. But has academia failed to recognize consistent speech harassment distinctions? Have there even been decisions that turned on the identities of the group involved?<br />Featuring:<br /><br />Prof. David Bernstein, University Professor of Law and Executive Director, Liberty &amp; Law Center, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University<br />Prof. Eugene Volokh, Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law<br />Jay Edelson, Founder &amp; CEO, Edelson PC<br />Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University<br />Moderator: Marcella Burke, Founder and Managing Partner of Burke Law Group PLLC]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>4401</itunes:duration><itunes:keywords>free speech &amp; election law,professional responsibility &amp;</itunes:keywords><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>A Discussion Within the Right: Why is There not a Larger Conservative Plaintiffs' Bar?</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/a-discussion-within-the-right-why-is-there-not-a-larger-conservative-plaintiffs-bar--59032348</link><description><![CDATA[For decades, the plaintiffs' bar has been populated by liberal lawyers who support left-wing elected officials and liberal causes, while conservative lawyers have largely joined the ranks of defense-side firms. In recent years, large public companies have become increasingly associated with political liberalism, and promoted contentious social issues that many conservatives reject – with biglaw defending them throughout.<br /><br />Given this shift in corporate behavior and business culture, it is reasonable to ask--why haven't more conservatives joined the plaintiffs’ bar that seeks to hold large companies accountable? Is our culture shifting in a fundamental way that will realign the legal profession? Or will the tension between supporting big business and believing in conservative views soon pass?<br /><br />Join us for a discussion that reflects the diversity of perspectives within the right on these questions.<br /><br /><b>Featuring:</b><br /><br /><b>James M. Burnham, </b>President, Vallecito Capital, LLC<br /><b>Ashley Keller, </b>Partner, Keller Postman<br /><b>Mark Behrens,</b> Co-Chair, Public Policy Group at Shook, Hardy &amp; Bacon L.L.P. <br /><b>Brandon Smith, </b>Chief of Staff, Office of the Tennessee Attorney General<br /><b><i>Moderator:</i> Andrew Ferguson, </b>Solicitor General of Virginia]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/59032348</guid><pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 2023 15:20:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/59032348/phpnlhbok.mp3" length="154195594" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/e886fdab-9272-4cdf-9180-0b7f6beff826/e886fdab-9272-4cdf-9180-0b7f6beff826.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/e886fdab-9272-4cdf-9180-0b7f6beff826/e886fdab-9272-4cdf-9180-0b7f6beff826.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/e886fdab-9272-4cdf-9180-0b7f6beff826/e886fdab-9272-4cdf-9180-0b7f6beff826.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>For decades, the plaintiffs' bar has been populated by liberal lawyers who support left-wing elected officials and liberal causes, while conservative lawyers have largely joined the ranks of defense-side firms. In recent years, large public companies...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[For decades, the plaintiffs' bar has been populated by liberal lawyers who support left-wing elected officials and liberal causes, while conservative lawyers have largely joined the ranks of defense-side firms. In recent years, large public companies have become increasingly associated with political liberalism, and promoted contentious social issues that many conservatives reject – with biglaw defending them throughout.<br /><br />Given this shift in corporate behavior and business culture, it is reasonable to ask--why haven't more conservatives joined the plaintiffs’ bar that seeks to hold large companies accountable? Is our culture shifting in a fundamental way that will realign the legal profession? Or will the tension between supporting big business and believing in conservative views soon pass?<br /><br />Join us for a discussion that reflects the diversity of perspectives within the right on these questions.<br /><br /><b>Featuring:</b><br /><br /><b>James M. Burnham, </b>President, Vallecito Capital, LLC<br /><b>Ashley Keller, </b>Partner, Keller Postman<br /><b>Mark Behrens,</b> Co-Chair, Public Policy Group at Shook, Hardy &amp; Bacon L.L.P. <br /><b>Brandon Smith, </b>Chief of Staff, Office of the Tennessee Attorney General<br /><b><i>Moderator:</i> Andrew Ferguson, </b>Solicitor General of Virginia]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>4818</itunes:duration><itunes:keywords>conservative,federalistsociety,litigation,plaintiffsbar</itunes:keywords><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>DEIA Initiatives in the Workplace Post-SFFA</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/deia-initiatives-in-the-workplace-post-sffa--59032358</link><description><![CDATA[In June, the Supreme Court held that consideration of applicants’ race in admissions decisions of Harvard and the University of North Carolina violated both the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution and Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Join us as two EEOC Commissioners, Democrat Vice Chair Jocelyn Samuels and Republican Commissioner Andrea Lucas, discuss their respective views on how this decision, the federal law banning employment discrimination (Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act), and EEOC regulations apply to employers’ DEI programs and initiatives. The Commissioners also will discuss their views on related topics such as the benefits and risks related to various categories of DEI programs; how employers should assess the lawfulness of their initiatives; and promising practices and guardrails for employers.<br /><br />Featuring:<br /><br />Jocelyn Samuels, Vice Chair, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission<br />Andrea Lucas, Commissioner, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission<br />Moderator: Kate Comerford Todd, Partner, Ellis George Cipollone]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/59032358</guid><pubDate>Tue, 17 Oct 2023 14:20:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/59032358/phpzfw1bd.mp3" length="140382623" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/7fde6ee5-d3e6-4080-97a6-15993ae98641/7fde6ee5-d3e6-4080-97a6-15993ae98641.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/7fde6ee5-d3e6-4080-97a6-15993ae98641/7fde6ee5-d3e6-4080-97a6-15993ae98641.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/7fde6ee5-d3e6-4080-97a6-15993ae98641/7fde6ee5-d3e6-4080-97a6-15993ae98641.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>In June, the Supreme Court held that consideration of applicants’ race in admissions decisions of Harvard and the University of North Carolina violated both the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution and Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act....</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[In June, the Supreme Court held that consideration of applicants’ race in admissions decisions of Harvard and the University of North Carolina violated both the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution and Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Join us as two EEOC Commissioners, Democrat Vice Chair Jocelyn Samuels and Republican Commissioner Andrea Lucas, discuss their respective views on how this decision, the federal law banning employment discrimination (Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act), and EEOC regulations apply to employers’ DEI programs and initiatives. The Commissioners also will discuss their views on related topics such as the benefits and risks related to various categories of DEI programs; how employers should assess the lawfulness of their initiatives; and promising practices and guardrails for employers.<br /><br />Featuring:<br /><br />Jocelyn Samuels, Vice Chair, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission<br />Andrea Lucas, Commissioner, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission<br />Moderator: Kate Comerford Todd, Partner, Ellis George Cipollone]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>4387</itunes:duration><itunes:keywords>affirmative action,labor &amp; employment law</itunes:keywords><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Academic Freedom and Freedom of Expression: Will the Proposed Accreditation Standard Support Freedom of Thought at Law Schools?</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/academic-freedom-and-freedom-of-expression-will-the-proposed-accreditation-standard-support-freedom-of-thought-at-law-schools--59032235</link><description><![CDATA[Recent high-profile incidents at law schools have raised questions about the scope of academic freedom for faculty and freedom of speech for students and faculty. At the suggestion of its Strategic Review Committee, the Council of the ABA's Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, which is the primary accreditor of American law schools, has put out for comment a proposed new accreditation standard, "Standard 208, Academic Freedom and Freedom of Expression." <br />As the Council describes the core concern behind the proposed standard: “Effective legal education and the development of the law require the free, robust, and uninhibited sharing of ideas reflecting a wide range of viewpoints. Becoming an effective advocate or counselor requires learning how to conduct candid and civil discourse in respectful disagreement with others while advancing reasoned and evidence-based arguments. Concerns about civility and mutual respect, however, do not justify barring discussion of ideas because they are controversial or even offensive or disagreeable to some.”<br />The Freedom of Thought Project has assembled a virtual panel to help illuminate discussion of various questions implicated by the proposed standard. Among other topics, the panel will consider the rationale for the standard put forward by the Council as well as the likely efficacy of the standard. It will also consider the role of accreditation standards in supporting freedom of thought at law schools.<br />Featuring:<br />Prof. Nicole Stelle Garnett, John P. Murphy Foundation Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame Law School<br />Daniel R. Thies, Shareholder, Webber &amp; Thies PC<br />Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld, Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law<br />Moderator: Hon. Carlos G. Muñiz, Chief Justice, Florida Supreme Court<br /><br />---<br />To register, click the link above.]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/59032235</guid><pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2023 14:15:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/59032235/phpz5wkcy.mp3" length="144585423" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/39916683-143a-4a5e-8875-2ddd213a25c9/39916683-143a-4a5e-8875-2ddd213a25c9.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/39916683-143a-4a5e-8875-2ddd213a25c9/39916683-143a-4a5e-8875-2ddd213a25c9.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/39916683-143a-4a5e-8875-2ddd213a25c9/39916683-143a-4a5e-8875-2ddd213a25c9.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>Recent high-profile incidents at law schools have raised questions about the scope of academic freedom for faculty and freedom of speech for students and faculty. At the suggestion of its Strategic Review Committee, the Council of the ABA's Section of...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[Recent high-profile incidents at law schools have raised questions about the scope of academic freedom for faculty and freedom of speech for students and faculty. At the suggestion of its Strategic Review Committee, the Council of the ABA's Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, which is the primary accreditor of American law schools, has put out for comment a proposed new accreditation standard, "Standard 208, Academic Freedom and Freedom of Expression." <br />As the Council describes the core concern behind the proposed standard: “Effective legal education and the development of the law require the free, robust, and uninhibited sharing of ideas reflecting a wide range of viewpoints. Becoming an effective advocate or counselor requires learning how to conduct candid and civil discourse in respectful disagreement with others while advancing reasoned and evidence-based arguments. Concerns about civility and mutual respect, however, do not justify barring discussion of ideas because they are controversial or even offensive or disagreeable to some.”<br />The Freedom of Thought Project has assembled a virtual panel to help illuminate discussion of various questions implicated by the proposed standard. Among other topics, the panel will consider the rationale for the standard put forward by the Council as well as the likely efficacy of the standard. It will also consider the role of accreditation standards in supporting freedom of thought at law schools.<br />Featuring:<br />Prof. Nicole Stelle Garnett, John P. Murphy Foundation Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame Law School<br />Daniel R. Thies, Shareholder, Webber &amp; Thies PC<br />Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld, Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law<br />Moderator: Hon. Carlos G. Muñiz, Chief Justice, Florida Supreme Court<br /><br />---<br />To register, click the link above.]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>4518</itunes:duration><itunes:keywords>education policy,free speech &amp; election law,professional responsibility &amp;</itunes:keywords><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Competition Policy, Corporate Concentration &amp; Freedom of Thought: Approaching the Draft Merger Guidelines</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/competition-policy-corporate-concentration-freedom-of-thought-approaching-the-draft-merger-guidelines--56489367</link><description><![CDATA[The Department of Justice has just released new Draft Merger Guidelines. What are the implications - not just for how the Draft Guidelines might affect economic questions, but also for freedom of thought and the rule of law? In this afternoon session, Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter and Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Doha Mekki will discuss these issues, the development of the Draft Guidelines and what comes next.<br />Featuring:<br /><br />Hon. Jonathan S. Kanter, Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice<br />Doha Mekki, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice<br />Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University<br />Moderator: James M. Burnham, President, Vallecito Capital, LLC]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/56489367</guid><pubDate>Wed, 16 Aug 2023 17:55:01 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/56489367/phpvhlmrp.mp3" length="93102653" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/19baea28-5592-4908-b1a7-69b1a74fa699/19baea28-5592-4908-b1a7-69b1a74fa699.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/19baea28-5592-4908-b1a7-69b1a74fa699/19baea28-5592-4908-b1a7-69b1a74fa699.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/19baea28-5592-4908-b1a7-69b1a74fa699/19baea28-5592-4908-b1a7-69b1a74fa699.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>The Department of Justice has just released new Draft Merger Guidelines. What are the implications - not just for how the Draft Guidelines might affect economic questions, but also for freedom of thought and the rule of law? In this afternoon session,...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[The Department of Justice has just released new Draft Merger Guidelines. What are the implications - not just for how the Draft Guidelines might affect economic questions, but also for freedom of thought and the rule of law? In this afternoon session, Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter and Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Doha Mekki will discuss these issues, the development of the Draft Guidelines and what comes next.<br />Featuring:<br /><br />Hon. Jonathan S. Kanter, Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice<br />Doha Mekki, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice<br />Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University<br />Moderator: James M. Burnham, President, Vallecito Capital, LLC]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>5819</itunes:duration><itunes:keywords>corporations,law &amp; economics,securities &amp; antitrust</itunes:keywords><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Open Minds: Thinking like a Conservative Plaintiff’s Lawyer - Corporations' Rights and Corporate Power</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/open-minds-thinking-like-a-conservative-plaintiff-s-lawyer-corporations-rights-and-corporate-power--53655429</link><description><![CDATA[Judge Gregory Katsas and Ashley Keller sit down for a wide-ranging discussion of his career as a conservative plaintiff’s lawyer, how he thinks about corporate rights and corporate power, and what Citizens United might say about competing First Amendment interests of corporations and human citizens.]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/53655429</guid><pubDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2023 05:16:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/53655429/phpoufkqf.mp3" length="80188080" type="audio/mpeg"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/86be3963-bdcc-4fe4-a4d7-b042da5b0ba4/86be3963-bdcc-4fe4-a4d7-b042da5b0ba4.srt" type="application/x-subrip" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/86be3963-bdcc-4fe4-a4d7-b042da5b0ba4/86be3963-bdcc-4fe4-a4d7-b042da5b0ba4.txt" type="text/plain" language="en"/><podcast:transcript url="https://transcription.spreaker.com/sounder/86be3963-bdcc-4fe4-a4d7-b042da5b0ba4/86be3963-bdcc-4fe4-a4d7-b042da5b0ba4.vtt" type="text/vtt" language="en"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>Judge Gregory Katsas and Ashley Keller sit down for a wide-ranging discussion of his career as a conservative plaintiff’s lawyer, how he thinks about corporate rights and corporate power, and what Citizens United might say about competing First...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[Judge Gregory Katsas and Ashley Keller sit down for a wide-ranging discussion of his career as a conservative plaintiff’s lawyer, how he thinks about corporate rights and corporate power, and what Citizens United might say about competing First Amendment interests of corporations and human citizens.]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>2506</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:season>1</itunes:season><itunes:episode>7</itunes:episode><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Open Minds with Matt Stoller &amp; Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld Part 2: Who is Exercising Private Power and What Do They Control?</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/open-minds-with-matt-stoller-prof-joshua-kleinfeld-part-2-who-is-exercising-private-power-and-what-do-they-control--52818020</link><description><![CDATA[In the second part of this interview, Matt and Prof. Kleinfeld discuss the roots of authoritarian trends we should be worried about in the United States and debate how ideological attitudes among few powerful elite have power over our cultural institutions and way of thinking.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Matt Stoller,</b> Director of Research, American Economic Liberties Project<br /><b>Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld,</b> Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law<br />]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/52818020</guid><pubDate>Wed, 22 Mar 2023 16:00:02 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/52818020/phpsp4so1.mp3" length="131252819" type="audio/mpeg"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>In the second part of this interview, Matt and Prof. Kleinfeld discuss the roots of authoritarian trends we should be worried about in the United States and debate how ideological attitudes among few powerful elite have power over our cultural...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[In the second part of this interview, Matt and Prof. Kleinfeld discuss the roots of authoritarian trends we should be worried about in the United States and debate how ideological attitudes among few powerful elite have power over our cultural institutions and way of thinking.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Matt Stoller,</b> Director of Research, American Economic Liberties Project<br /><b>Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld,</b> Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law<br />]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>4101</itunes:duration><itunes:keywords>culture,federalism,federalist society</itunes:keywords><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:season>1</itunes:season><itunes:episode>6</itunes:episode><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Open Minds with Matt Stoller &amp; Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld Part 1: What Sparked the Fascination With Economics and Government?</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/open-minds-with-matt-stoller-prof-joshua-kleinfeld-part-1-what-sparked-the-fascination-with-economics-and-government--52818011</link><description><![CDATA[In Part 1 of Open Minds with Matt Stoller, we hear about how Matt's formative years shaped his interest in economics and government. Matt tells us about how he thinks about politics in a way that bends categories and how antitrust relates to contemporary problems.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Matt Stoller,</b> Director of Research, American Economic Liberties Project<br /><b>Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld,</b> Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/52818011</guid><pubDate>Wed, 08 Mar 2023 17:00:01 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/52818011/phpyz8hy6.mp3" length="129362781" type="audio/mpeg"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>In Part 1 of Open Minds with Matt Stoller, we hear about how Matt's formative years shaped his interest in economics and government. Matt tells us about how he thinks about politics in a way that bends categories and how antitrust relates to...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[In Part 1 of Open Minds with Matt Stoller, we hear about how Matt's formative years shaped his interest in economics and government. Matt tells us about how he thinks about politics in a way that bends categories and how antitrust relates to contemporary problems.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Matt Stoller,</b> Director of Research, American Economic Liberties Project<br /><b>Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld,</b> Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>4042</itunes:duration><itunes:keywords>corporations,culture,federalist society,financial services,law &amp; economics,securities &amp; antitrust</itunes:keywords><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:season>1</itunes:season><itunes:episode>5</itunes:episode><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Open Minds with Prof. Randy Barnett &amp; Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld: Applying Libertarian Convictions in The Real World</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/open-minds-with-prof-randy-barnett-prof-joshua-kleinfeld-applying-libertarian-convictions-in-the-real-world--52817971</link><description><![CDATA[Prof. Randy Barnett joins Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld to discuss how his life experiences have informed his libertarian convictions. Along the way, he has rubbed shoulders with some of the giants in Libertarian political philosophy and made significant contributions to the legal discourse - with over 24,000 citations. Now among the most highly regarded libertarian legal academics, Prof. Barnett considers how libertarian premises might be refined to address current institutional culture war challenges.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><b><i></i></b><br /><b>Prof. Randy E. Barnett,</b> Patrick Hotung Professor of Constitutional Law, Georgetown University Law Center<br /><b>Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld,</b> Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law<br />]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/52817971</guid><pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2023 22:00:00 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/52817971/php7hd1tp.mp3" length="146627002" type="audio/mpeg"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>Prof. Randy Barnett joins Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld to discuss how his life experiences have informed his libertarian convictions. Along the way, he has rubbed shoulders with some of the giants in Libertarian political philosophy and made significant...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[Prof. Randy Barnett joins Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld to discuss how his life experiences have informed his libertarian convictions. Along the way, he has rubbed shoulders with some of the giants in Libertarian political philosophy and made significant contributions to the legal discourse - with over 24,000 citations. Now among the most highly regarded libertarian legal academics, Prof. Barnett considers how libertarian premises might be refined to address current institutional culture war challenges.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><b><i></i></b><br /><b>Prof. Randy E. Barnett,</b> Patrick Hotung Professor of Constitutional Law, Georgetown University Law Center<br /><b>Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld,</b> Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law<br />]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>4581</itunes:duration><itunes:keywords>culture,federalist society,politics</itunes:keywords><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:season>1</itunes:season><itunes:episode>4</itunes:episode><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Open Minds with Prof. Eugene Volokh &amp; Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld, Part III</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/open-minds-with-prof-eugene-volokh-prof-joshua-kleinfeld-part-iii--52498315</link><description><![CDATA[Finally, we turn to the present moment and consider the current challenges to American free speech and culture. How does cancel culture contribute to professional blacklisting at law firms and universities? Professor Volokh tackles this issue and addresses the role of social media companies in restricting speech and participating in canceling.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Prof. Eugene Volokh,</b> Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law<br /><b>Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld,</b> Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law<br />]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/52498315</guid><pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2023 17:31:01 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/52498315/phprh4fwf.mp3" length="117942571" type="audio/mpeg"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>Finally, we turn to the present moment and consider the current challenges to American free speech and culture. How does cancel culture contribute to professional blacklisting at law firms and universities? Professor Volokh tackles this issue and...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[Finally, we turn to the present moment and consider the current challenges to American free speech and culture. How does cancel culture contribute to professional blacklisting at law firms and universities? Professor Volokh tackles this issue and addresses the role of social media companies in restricting speech and participating in canceling.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Prof. Eugene Volokh,</b> Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law<br /><b>Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld,</b> Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law<br />]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>3685</itunes:duration><itunes:keywords>federalist society</itunes:keywords><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:season>1</itunes:season><itunes:episode>3</itunes:episode><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Open Minds with Prof. Eugene Volokh &amp; Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld, Part II</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/open-minds-with-prof-eugene-volokh-prof-joshua-kleinfeld-part-ii--52498294</link><description><![CDATA[What are the fundamentals of how free speech law works and what are the outer limits of free speech protection? Is it constitutional to allow voters to wear a Trump hat while casting a ballot? Tune in to hear Professor Volokh's perspective.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Prof. Eugene Volokh,</b> Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law<br /><b>Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld,</b> Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/52498294</guid><pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2023 17:31:01 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/52498294/phpgp2swd.mp3" length="64989715" type="audio/mpeg"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>What are the fundamentals of how free speech law works and what are the outer limits of free speech protection? Is it constitutional to allow voters to wear a Trump hat while casting a ballot? Tune in to hear Professor Volokh's perspective....</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[What are the fundamentals of how free speech law works and what are the outer limits of free speech protection? Is it constitutional to allow voters to wear a Trump hat while casting a ballot? Tune in to hear Professor Volokh's perspective.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Prof. Eugene Volokh,</b> Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law<br /><b>Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld,</b> Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>2030</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:season>1</itunes:season><itunes:episode>2</itunes:episode><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item><item><title>Open Minds with Prof. Eugene Volokh &amp; Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld, Part I</title><link>https://www.spreaker.com/episode/open-minds-with-prof-eugene-volokh-prof-joshua-kleinfeld-part-i--52497236</link><description><![CDATA[What made Professor Volokh the independent and influential thinker he is today? It began with an unusual childhood and education. He discusses how his early years shaped his career path, how he has developed his approach to law and doctrine, and which major justification of free speech most resonates with him.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Prof. Eugene Volokh,</b> Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law<br /><b>Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld,</b> Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">https://api.spreaker.com/episode/52497236</guid><pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2023 17:31:01 +0000</pubDate><enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/52497236/phphfhgup.mp3" length="92936177" type="audio/mpeg"/><itunes:author>The Federalist Society</itunes:author><itunes:subtitle>What made Professor Volokh the independent and influential thinker he is today? It began with an unusual childhood and education. He discusses how his early years shaped his career path, how he has developed his approach to law and doctrine, and which...</itunes:subtitle><itunes:summary><![CDATA[What made Professor Volokh the independent and influential thinker he is today? It began with an unusual childhood and education. He discusses how his early years shaped his career path, how he has developed his approach to law and doctrine, and which major justification of free speech most resonates with him.<br /><br /><i><b>Featuring:</b></i><br /><br /><b>Prof. Eugene Volokh,</b> Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law<br /><b>Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld,</b> Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law]]></itunes:summary><itunes:duration>2903</itunes:duration><itunes:explicit>false</itunes:explicit><itunes:image href="https://d3wo5wojvuv7l.cloudfront.net/t_rss_itunes_square_1400/images.spreaker.com/original/e912a92d762c9ad9ed8fdcd65a21081c.jpg"/><itunes:season>1</itunes:season><itunes:episode>1</itunes:episode><itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType></item></channel></rss>
