Join Webinar


On June 26, 2024, the Supreme Court issued their opinion in Murthy v. Missouri. Originally filed as Missouri v. Biden, this case concerns whether federal government officials violated five individuals’ freedom of speech by “coercing” or “significantly encouraging” social media companies to remove or demote particular content from their platforms.
Experts discuss and react to this 6-3 ruling.
Featuring:

Moderator: Brent Skorup, Legal Fellow, Center for Constitutional Studies, Cato Insitute

Speakers:

Corbin K. Barthold, Internet Policy Counsel and Director of Appellate Litigation
Josh Divine, Solicitor General, Missouri Attorney General's Office
Jenin Younes, Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance

With conflict rising across the globe and a presidential election this year, the United States is positioned to reevaluate its foreign policy approach to current and future challenges. This panel will examine the role the US should play in global affairs. What should American engagement look like today? This discussion will explore whether the US should recalibrate its grand strategy to effectively address emerging conflicts, technological advancements, and global threats.
By evaluating past strategies and envisioning future directions, the panel aims to offer insights and opinions on the future of US foreign policy in the 21st century.
Featuring:

Lt. General (Ret.) Keith Kellogg, Co-Chair, Center for American Security
Dr. Kori Schake, Director of Foreign and Defense Policy Studies, American Enterprise Institute
Matthew R. A. Heiman, Chief Legal & Administrative Officer, Waystar Health

Lunch will be served at 12:00 p.m. with remarks from Prof. Eliot A. Cohen to follow.
The address is titled "Can America Remain a Global Power?"

Over the past two years, a series of regional conflicts has resulted in diplomatic tensions and increased conflict. The ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine has raised concerns about the future of Europe's diplomatic landscape. Additionally, renewed conflict in the Middle East, particularly following the October 7th terror attack, has led to questions about the future of the Israel-Palestine conflict, the threat posed by Iran, and the stability of relations between the West and the Arab world. Furthermore, China's persistent aggression towards Taiwan has heightened concerns about the potential for conflict in the Pacific region.
This panel will examine how the US can effectively prioritize its engagement in these regions. Panelists will offer perspectives on whether greater attention should be given to Asia, Europe, or the Middle East, and how to address the specific challenges in each region.
Featuring:

Michael Allen, Managing Director, Beacon Global Strategies LLC
Mark Dubowitz, Chief Executive Officer, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Prof. Julian Ku, Interim Dean, Maurice A. Deane Distinguished Professor of Constitutional Law & Faculty Director of International Programs, Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University
Moderator: Jamil N. Jaffer, Adjunct Professor, NSI Founder, and Director, National Security Law & Policy Program, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University

At the Federal Communications Commission’s November 2023 meeting, the agency approved rules aimed at preventing and eliminating digital discrimination. These rules are a culmination of a controversial multi-year proceeding, kicked off by Section 60506 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021.
In this webinar, a panel of experts will discuss policies and issues underlying the FCC’s rules, challenges that companies may face in compliance with the rules, as well as the issues before the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, where the FCC’s digital discrimination order is being challenged. Panelists will also discuss some of the potential future obligations that remain open in the FCC’s proceeding.
Featuring:
Diana Eisner, Vice President, Policy & Advocacy, USTelecom
Denny Law, General Manager / CEO, Golden West Telecommunications
Dr. Alisa Valentin, Broadband Policy Director, Public Knowledge
Moderator: Danielle Thumann, Senior Attorney, Government Relations, Crown Castle
---
To register, click the link above.

Join us for a closing banquet and the Arthur N. Rupe Debate, entitled "Resolved: The Separation of Powers is a Dangerous, Extraconstitutional Maxim." Special code on nametag required for admission.
Featuring:

Prof. Noah Feldman, Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law and Director, Julis-Rabinowitz Program on Jewish and Israeli Law, Harvard Law School
Prof. Michael W. McConnell, Richard and Frances Mallery Professor and Director of the Constitutional Law Center, Stanford Law School
Moderator: Hon. Steven J. Menashi, Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Suppose we don’t like how our governmental powers are separated. Perhaps we think the executive branch has too much power. Or perhaps we think that it is doing more than the original meaning of “the executive power” would suggest, but we think that is a good thing. What are the legitimate methods of constitutional change in our republic? Must we amend the Constitution? How should an originalist approach these questions?
Featuring:

Prof. Sherif Girgis, Associate Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame Law School
Prof. Lawrence Lessig, Roy L. Furman Professor of Law and Leadership, Harvard Law School
Prof. Stephen E. Sachs, Antonin Scalia Professor of Law, Harvard Law School
Moderator: Hon. Britt C. Grant, Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

New presidential administrations start with a flurry of administrative actions. These fresh rules, guidelines, and procedures in turn face judicial scrutiny from the moment they are finalized. Oversight from the judiciary can keep agencies accountable and within the bounds of the law. But when judges get the final say on everything the executive does, policies can take years—even decades—to implement and can fluctuate wildly with the ebbs and flows of litigation. Has something gone awry with the way judges are “saying what the law is”?
Featuring:

Prof. John C. Harrison, James Madison Distinguished Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
Prof. Amanda L. Tyler, Shannon C. Turner Professor of Law, University of California, Berkeley School of Law
Prof. Jeannie Suk Gersen, John H. Watson, Jr. Professor of Law, Harvard Law School
Prof. Gary S. Lawson, Associate Dean for Intellectual Life and Philip S. Beck Professor of Law, Boston University School of Law
Moderator: Hon. Benjamin Beaton, Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky

Many critics of modern administrative law want a world where Congress does more things, and the executive does less—which would lead to relative stability across administrations. Simultaneously, many also want their vote in presidential elections to have meaningful policy consequences. Between these two competing intuitions lies a tension at the heart of much contemporary political strife, which, of course, has a great deal to do with who controls Congress and who controls the White House.
Featuring:

Prof. Julian Davis Mortenson, James G. Phillipp Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law School
Eli Nachmany, Associate, Covington & Burling LLP
Prof. Jed Handelsman Shugerman, Professor of Law and Joseph Lipsett Scholar, Boston University School of Law
Prof. Christopher J. Walker, Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law School
Moderator: Hon. Jennifer Walker Elrod, Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Professor Cass Sunstein and Judge Raymond Kethledge will open the symposium with a fireside chat exploring the conceptual question of why states choose to separate powers along with the relationship between the separation of powers and the rule of law.
Featuring

Hon. Raymond M. Kethledge, Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and Lecturer on Law, Harvard Law School
Prof. Cass R. Sunstein, Robert Walmsley University Professor, Harvard Law School