FedSoc Events

No one maintains that the Court has always and forever been originalist in its orientation. By any definition of "originalism," there is a vast body of case law that does not conform to it. How do and should modern originalists - and here one might specifically include lower-court judges who consider themselves originalist - handle this case law? Do non-originalist precedents count for nothing, no...

The Supreme Court’s decisions in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis and in Groff v. DeJoy posed issues about religious freedom in the workplace and religiously motivated speech in the marketplace. This panel will consider the cases and their implications for religious freedom, especially how future cases might apply the tests articulated by the Court for “substantial costs” t...

In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has emphasized the federalist nature of our national Constitution and the importance of preserving state sovereignty. This trend is evident in several of the Court's decisions – Dobbs most notable among them – that have recognized and reinforced the authority of individual states in matters of health, safety, and morals. As a result of th...

Stare Decisis, a Latin term meaning “let it stand,” is a key element of how American law is interpreted, applied, and adjudicated. When applied, it leads courts to stand by decided cases, to uphold precedents, and/or to maintain former adjudications. How exactly that principle should be applied, however, is a topic of some debate. In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Or...

Article III of the Constitution vests the “judicial Power” in “one Supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.” Our founding document recognizes that the Supreme Court stands apart from the rest of the federal judiciary. Yet, Congress has long regulated several aspects of the high court, including it...

Although a creature of statute, American antitrust law functions in practice as a field of common law. Courts have had the preeminent role in shaping the contours of its application, imposing the “rule of reason” and defining concepts like competition and the use of economic evidence. While antitrust precedents are closely examined by practitioners and academics alike, less att...

The United States adopted its modern environmental statutes in the 1970s. Among other innovations, Congress incorporated citizen suit provisions into the Clean Air, Clean Water Act, and Endangered Species Act. These created causes of action allowing individuals and interested entities to sue to enforce the environmental laws. At the same time, courts took an increasingly expansive view of the priv...

Over the last two decades, states have played an important and increasing role in federal policymaking through state-led litigation. Unsurprisingly, a state’s Article III standing is often a hotly contested question—with increasing attention from the Supreme Court and what some might argue are scattershot results. Are states subject to traditional standing analysis, as the Cour...

CLE credit for this event is available at On-Demand CLE. Featuring: Ms. Erin E. Murphy, Partner, Clement & Murphy, PLLC Mr. Patrick Strawbridge, Partner, Consovoy McCarthy Park PLLC Hon. Seth P. Waxman, Partner, WilmerHale; Former United States Solicitor General Moderator: Hon. Timothy M. Tymkovich, United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

In recent years federal executive branch agencies have enacted a “whole of government” approach to hot-button topics like environmental, social, governance (ESG) and cryptocurrency regulation. This theory of policy administration combines the efforts of multiple executive branch agencies with different expertise and authorities toward achieving a singular objective. Some of the...

Trying to sort out what originalism means in practice requires integrating insights from all levels of the legal system, from academicians (both legal and historical), lawyers (from private practice, public interest, business, and government), and the bench (both trial and appellate and both state and federal). In this Roundtable, participants representing many of those elements of the legal cultu...

In 1964, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in New York Times v. Sullivan treating public figures to a different, more onerous standard when they were the victims of defamator falsehoods than in traditional libel cases. Recently, Justice Thomas and Justice Gorsuch have expressed skepticism about the constitutional infirmity of this decision. Our panelists will provide their perspectives on...

Featuring: Zack Smith, Legal Fellow and Manager, Supreme Court and Appellate Advocacy Program, Meese Center, The Heritage Foundation Henry Whitaker, Solicitor General, Florida Moderator, Hon. Raag Singhal, Judge, United States District Court, Southern District of Florida

Featuring: Hon. John B. Nalbandian, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

PRESS: Please email Michael Mead (mmead@crcadvisors.com) to register.

The First Amendment forbids public officials from censoring disfavored speech and speakers. But what happens if public officials enlist private parties to do the censorship? In recent years, public officials and agencies have pressed social-media platforms to silence dissenting views on public health and other “misinformation,” insurers and financial institutions to drop clients engage...

The Supreme Court continues to accept for review cases that challenge agency authority on separation of powers grounds, and its decisions may fundamentally reshape the modern administrative state. This term, it heard challenges to the jurisdiction of federal courts to hear challenges to agency proceedings (Axon v. FTC; SEC v. Cochran), and to the Biden administration’s authority to forgive s...

Antitrust law has made recent headlines for a host of reasons, ranging from Chairwoman Lina Kahn’s approach to running the Federal Trade Commission to the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division’s high-profile cases against tech giants such as Google. In this lunch session, former FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz, a Democrat, will join former FTC Commissioner Noah Joshua Phillips, a...

At the end of an administration, the President and Vice President are required to relinquish control over certain documents, pursuant to the Presidential Records Act. Recently, it has come to light that former officials of both parties have brought certain classified documents to their private residences and other non-governmental property. This panel will explore the legal, ethical, national secu...

This panel will evaluate efforts in the Biden administration, building upon executive actions dating back to the Clinton administration, to refocus federal agencies in a “whole of government” manner on “environmental justice” (EJ). The Civil Rights Act and various executive orders are cited as the primary legal support for these initiatives. On this basis, enforcement prior...

Earlier this month, the White House released much-anticipated changes to federal regulatory practices, including a new Executive Order 14094 on “Modernize Regulatory Review,” draft revisions to Circular A-4 governing regulatory impact analysis, and draft guidance on meetings with entities outside of the executive branch. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) has the l...

Anxiety regarding parental rights in American healthcare and education is at an all time high. Our panel will discuss questions such as, “Are parental rights being circumvented at the schoolhouse and medical office doors?”; “Who decides the best interest of the child?”; “When should the state’s judgment supersede parents’ judgme...

Policymaker interest in alternatives to traditional public schools has sharply increased post-pandemic, with some states considering and adopting proposals to provide educator regulatory relief; increase access to charter schools; offer additional vouchers and tax credit programs; and create education savings account options to increase choice in education. Optics on professions in education have...

Featuring: The Honorable Todd Rokita, Attorney General, State of Indiana

Panelists will offer their diverse perspectives on the current state of the Wisconsin Supreme Court and the issues it is facing, its potential docket, and emerging legal controversies that may affect the court's future work. They will explore issues such as the role of the court in shaping public policy, the importance of judicial independence, and challenges that the court will face as it adapts...