Teleforum

When it enacted the FTCA, Congress waived sovereign immunity and accepted vicarious liability for certain torts committed by federal employees. The judgment bar provision of the FTCA provides that the judgment in an FTCA action “shall constitute a complete bar to any action by the claimant, by reason of the same subject matter, against the employee of the government whose act or omission gave rise to the claim.” The question before the Court is whether this judgment bar provision is triggered in an action with both FTCA and constitutional claims, when an FTCA claim is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court will hear this case on November 9, 2020. Featuring: -- Patrick Jaicomo, Attorney, Institute for Justice-- Roman Martinez, Latham & Watkins LLP

When it comes to juvenile convictions and sentencing, some gray areas may be encountered. Brett Jones found himself a product of this uncertainty in his post-conviction relief proceeding. At the age of 15 Jones stabbed his grandfather to death and was sentenced to life in prison; however, at this hearing the Mississippi Supreme Court ordered he be resentenced after a hearing to determine his parole eligibility. Simultaneous to this decision was the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Miller v. Alabama and Montgomery v. Louisiana; in Miller, the Court held that mandatory life in prison without parole for juveniles was a violation of the Eighth Amendment, and in Montgomery, it clarified that Miller barred life in prison without parole for all juveniles except for "the rarest of juvenile offenders, those whose crimes reflect permanent incorrigibility." Despite this precedent, the Circuit court held that Jones was still not entitled to parole eligibility. Featuring: -- Marc Levin, Chief of Policy & Innovation, R

Under the Clean Water Act, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must approve clean water intakes, used by factories to cool machinery, before any are built. The EPA is required to consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service to conduct a study of the new intake on marine life. The Sierra Club made a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records made by the EPA during the agency's rule making process, including the documentation of consultation with the services. The Services records were withheld citing Exemption 5 of the FOIA shielding from disclosure documents subject to the "deliberative process privilege". The district court determined twelve of the sixteen restricted documents were not subject to Exemption 5. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the lower court's order to disclose some of the records but reversed the decision regarding two of the records. Our discussion will review the record and discuss next steps.Featuring: Damien Sch

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) makes it a crime (and a tort) to access “without authorization” a computer to obtain information from that computer. But is the CFAA limited to cases in which an outsider hacks into a system or database to gain information, or does it also cover cases where a person who has permission to be on the system uses that permission for manifestly improper purposes – for example, where an employee uses access to their employer’s computers to steal information on those computers for themselves or for a competitor? In Van Buren v. United States, the Supreme Court will address this question, which has vexed federal courts for more than a decade. Mr. Joseph DeMarco, who has filed two amicus briefs in that case, will discuss the legal issues involved in Van Buren and the potential ramifications of the Court’s decision in this closely-watched case. Featuring: Joseph DeMarco, Partner, DeVore & DeMarco LLP This call is open to the public and press.

Iran is in significant non-performance of its commitments under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Yet, the United Nations Security Council and America’s European allies have failed to “snapback” sanctions on Iran as agreed in the JCPOA. Join us for a conversation between Brian Hook, former Special Representative for Iran, and Dr. Jeremy Rabkin, Professor of Law at George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School, for a conversation about the future of U.S.-Iranian policy and how to prevent Iran from achieving its nuclear ambitions.Featuring: -- Brian Hook, former U.S. Special Representative for Iran and Senior Policy Advisor to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo-- Prof. Jeremy A. Rabkin, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University

Join us as Beth Williams, the U.S. Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Policy at the United States Department of Justice, discusses the priorities and work of her office during COVID-19 and 2020. Featuring: -- Hon. Beth A. Williams, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Policy, United States Department of Justice

Can Catholic judges, consistently with their faith, participate in death penalty cases? Faithful Catholics who have considered the question in recent decades have reached different conclusions. In 1998, Judge Amy Barrett, then a law clerk on the D.C. Circuit, co-authored an article concluding that it is immoral under Church teaching to directly participate in executions in a modern society with a functional prison system. Accordingly, she concluded that Catholic trial judges cannot in good conscience issue a death sentence and have an obligation to recuse themselves from the sentencing phase of capital trials. Appellate judges, on the other hand, need not recuse themselves in capital cases, because they do not directly issue death sentences. Justice Antonin Scalia took a different view. In a 2002 article, he asserted that if the death penalty were immoral under Church teaching, he could not participate in capital cases and would have an obligation to resign from the Supreme Court. But because he believ

The Department of Defense (DoD) recently issued a Request for Information about the possibility of constructing a new national 5G network on 450 MHz of mid-band spectrum presently assigned to the Department. Access to this spectrum by commercial wireless services could be granted when it is not needed for national security requirements through a dynamic spectrum-sharing arrangement. Many members of Congress from both sides of the aisle, as well as members of the Federal Communications Commission, have expressed concern about DoD’s intentions. Recent press reports assert that several high-ranking officials in the White House are pushing the idea despite President Trump’s public opposition to such a plan. Should the DoD proceed with constructing its own network? Should the 450 MHz of mid-band spectrum be auctioned to private providers? Should the Department instead rely on the network services of commercial wireless providers? Please join us for a teleforum with industry experts to discuss the policy and econom

This week, the United States Department of Justice launched its rumored antitrust law suit against Google. The government's complaint brief alleges that Google has a monopoly in search and search advertising, and has unlawfully maintained that monopoly. Among the many complaints, the government points specifically to the billion dollar payments google pays to Apple, in exchange for Apple carrying the search engine on be the de facto search engine on its iOS platform. The Government is alleging that these practices are not in the best interests of consumers or competition. The case is the most high profile antitrust case in decades, and could potentially remake Google, antitrust law, and the internet as we know it. Today's Teleforum is cosponsored by The Bork Foundation, a non-partisan, nonprofit educational foundation just launched, led by Robert H. Bork, Jr. who chairs a board which includes today's speaker, George L. Priest, the Edward J. Phelps Professor of Law and Economics and Kauffman Distinguished Rese

Join Dean Mazzone and Matt Cavedon for a discussion of major criminal cases at the U.S. Supreme Court from both last year and the current term. Discussion will cover areas of law ranging from the death penalty and searches and seizures to sentencing guidelines and computer crimes.Featuring: Dean A. Mazzone, Senior Trial Counsel, Massachusetts Attorney GeneralMatthew Cavedon, Assistant Public Defender, Northeastern Judicial Circuit Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up on our website. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

Join us as John Malcolm and John Yoo discuss recent Supreme Court news, the 25th amendment, what happens if the Electoral College deadlocks (or fails), as well as the latest on the confirmation hearings for Judge Amy Coney Barrett.Featuring: John G. Malcolm, Vice President, Institute for Constitutional Government, Director of the Meese Center for Legal & Judicial Studies and Senior Legal Fellow, The Heritage FoundationProf. John C. Yoo, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law, University of California at Berkeley School of Law This call is open to the public - please dial 888-752-3232 to access the call.

Article II and the 12th Amendment require those seeking the office of President and Vice-President be a natural-born citizen. The 14th Amendment provides that "all persons born...in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens." But what does it mean to be "subject to the jurisdiction thereof?" These two texts have been the subject of controversy throughout the past decade, and present interesting legal questions for constitutional theorists. Is it enough to be born in the U.S.A.?In conjunction with the Chapman University and UCLA Federalist Society chapters, the Federalism and Separation of Powers Practice Group is poised to host renowned Constitutional scholars John Eastman and Eugene Volokh. Eastman and Volokh will debate the meaning of the Constitution's citizenship clauses live on Zoom. The Honorable Andrew Guilford, Ret., will moderate with Q&A to follow. Featuring: -- Eugene Volokh, Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law-- John Eastman, Henry

In 2014, Roxanne Torres pleaded guilty to three crimes: aggravated fleeing from a law enforcement officer, assault on a police officer, and unlawfully taking a motor vehicle. All of these crimes occurred while Ms. Torres was under the influence of methamphetamine. Ms. Torres was stopped by two police officers only after one shot and wounded her. In October of 2016, she filed a civil rights complaint in federal court against the two arresting officers in which she claimed the officers used excessive force and conspired to use excessive force. After the court interpreted her complaint under the Fourth Amendment, the court dismissed the case claiming the officers are entitled to qualified immunity. The court reasoned that because there was no seizure at the time of the shooting, there could be no Fourth Amendment violation. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the lower court's decision. Featuring: Kent Scheidegger, Legal Director & General Counsel, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation Telef

Consolidated with United States v. Collins, United States v. Briggs challenges the idea that a rape charge may only be prosecuted if it is discovered within five years of the crime. Michael Briggs was found guilty of rape in 2014; however, Briggs claimed that the statute of limitations had expired, as the crime happened in 2005. Briggs was convicted by the U.S. Air Force Criminal Court and, after a fairly complicated procedural route, will now be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.Featuring: Arthur Rizer, Director, Criminal Justice & Civil Liberties; Resident Senior Fellow, R Street InstituteProf. Richard Sala, Assistant Professor of Law, Vermont Law School Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up on our website. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

Liability in motor vehicle accidents is frequently an issue necessitating litigation, but not typically at the level of the Supreme Court. In this case, though, two incidents rose all the way to our highest court. In a Minnesota accident, a passenger driving a Ford vehicle suffered severe brain injury when the passenger-side airbags failed to deploy during an accident. Ford found itself in another case, this time in Montana, involving a vehicle's tread/belt separation and resulting in fatality for the driver. Despite their efforts to dismiss these claims by citing a lack of personal jurisdiction, the state courts and state supreme courts in both cases affirmed the ruling of liability and negligence on the part of Ford Motor Company. The Supreme Court will now decide whether the "arise out of or relate to" requirement of the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause permits a state court to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a nonresident. Featuring:Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federati

There was surprising momentum on the issue of insider trading reform at the start of 2020. On December 9, 2019, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Insider Trading Prohibition Act with wide bi-partisan support. In January 2020, the Securities and Exchange Commission sponsored Bharara Task Force on Insider Trading released a report containing proposed legislation. Both the House bill and the task force's proposal recommend redefining insider trading as the wrongful use of information in securities trading. What do these recommendations for reform mean by "wrongful" use? After evaluating the current state of the law, this panel will discuss the economic and ethical implications of the two reform proposals.Featuring: -- Jonathan R. Macey, Sam Harris Professor of Corporate Law, Corporate Finance, and Securities Law, Yale University-- John Anderson, Professor of Law, Mississippi College School of Law, and the author of Insider Trading: Law, Ethics, and Reform-- Moderator: Kevin R. Douglas, Assistant Profe

October 14, 2020 marks the 40th anniversary of the enactment of the Staggers Rail Act -- the law that largely deregulated economic dealings within the freight rail sector. So far removed, the anniversary may seem irrelevant, but the opposite is true: rail deregulation serves as an important case study on matters related to competition, markets, rate regulation and capitalism writ large. Please join us for a discussion to analyze the rail regulatory experience and to see if there are any lessons to be learned from efforts to impose "common carrier" utility regulations on other sectors in the American economy. Covered topics will include a summary of rail deregulation, how it continues to be challenged and why core tenets of the Staggers Act are especially relevant for salient discussions related to ratemaking and due process under the Fifth Amendment.Featuring:-- George S. Ford, Chief Economist, Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Public Policy Studies-- Timothy Strafford, Associate General Coun

Clemente Avelino Pereida faced removability charges by the Department of Homeland Security after receiving a conviction of attempted criminal impersonation in Nebraska. As a citizen and native of Mexico, Pereida filed for an application for relief from removal. An immigration judge barred relief from removal, finding moral turpitude in his conviction. The Board of Immigration Appeals found that he was statutorily ineligible for cancellation of removal. 8th Circuit denied Pereida's petition for review.Featuring: -- Brian M. Fish, Special Assistant, United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland

Join us as Paul Ray, the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the Office of Management and Budget, discusses the priorities and work of his office during 2020.Featuring: -- Hon. Paul J. Ray, Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget

Ranging from Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and Thomas Jefferson to Henry Kissinger, Ronald Reagan, and James Baker, America in the World tells the vibrant story of American diplomacy. Recounting the actors and events of U.S. foreign policy, Roberty Zoellick identifies five traditions that have emerged from America's encounters with the world: the importance of North America; the special roles trading, transnational, and technological relations play in defining ties with others; changing attitudes toward alliances and ways of ordering connections among states; the need for public support, especially through Congress; and the belief that American policy should serve a larger purpose. These traditions frame a closing review of post-Cold War presidencies, which Zoellick foresees serving as guideposts for the future.Featuring:-- Robert B. Zoellick, Author, America in the World: A History of U.S. Diplomacy and Foreign Policy-- Moderator: Matthew R. A. Heiman, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary, Ways