Folgen
-
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?
Featuring:
Ryan Newman, General Counsel, Executive Office of the Governor, State of Florida
Alida Kass, Vice President & Director, Strategic Initiatives and Freedom of Thought Project, The Federalist Society -
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.
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?
Featuring:
Alan Gura, Vice President for Litigation, Institute for Free Speech
Prof. Julia D. Mahoney, John S. Battle Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
Matt Stoller, Director of Research, American Economic Liberties Project
Moderator: Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University -
Fehlende Folgen?
-
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.
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.
Featuring:
Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
Inez Stepman, Senior Policy Analyst, Independent Women’s Forum -
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.
-
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.
-
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.
Featuring:
Ryan L. Bangert, Senior Vice President, Strategic Initiatives & Special Counsel to the President, Alliance Defending Freedom
Prof. Julia D. Mahoney, John S. Battle Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
Prof. Ganesh Sitaraman, New York Alumni Chancellor's Chair in Law, Vanderbilt University Law School
Prof. Zephyr Teachout, Professor of Law, Fordham Law School
Moderator: James M. Burnham, President, Vallecito Capital, LLC -
In June of last year, 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.
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?
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.
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.
Featuring:
Jason C. Schwartz, Partner, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher
Jay Edelson, Founder & CEO, Edelson PC
Stacy Hawkins, Professor of Law, Rutgers Law School
Jonathan Berry, Managing Partner, Boyden Gray PLLC
Moderator: Hon. Gregory G. Katsas, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit -
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?
Featuring:
Prof. David Bernstein, University Professor of Law and Executive Director, Liberty & Law Center, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
Prof. Eugene Volokh, Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law
Jay Edelson, Founder & CEO, Edelson PC
Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
Moderator: Marcella Burke, Founder and Managing Partner of Burke Law Group PLLC -
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.
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?
Join us for a discussion that reflects the diversity of perspectives within the right on these questions.
Featuring:
James M. Burnham, President, Vallecito Capital, LLC
Ashley Keller, Partner, Keller Postman
Mark Behrens, Co-Chair, Public Policy Group at Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P.
Brandon Smith, Chief of Staff, Office of the Tennessee Attorney General
Moderator: Andrew Ferguson, Solicitor General of Virginia -
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.
Featuring:
Jocelyn Samuels, Vice Chair, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Andrea Lucas, Commissioner, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Moderator: Kate Comerford Todd, Partner, Ellis George Cipollone -
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."
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.”
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.
Featuring:
Prof. Nicole Stelle Garnett, John P. Murphy Foundation Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame Law School
Daniel R. Thies, Shareholder, Webber & Thies PC
Prof. Joshua Kleinfeld, Professor of Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law
Moderator: Hon. Carlos G. Muñiz, Chief Justice, Florida Supreme Court
---
To register, click the link above. -
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.
Featuring:
Hon. Jonathan S. Kanter, Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice
Doha Mekki, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice
Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
Moderator: James M. Burnham, President, Vallecito Capital, LLC -
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
