FedSoc Blog

Today, people read almost daily reports about the "broken patent system" in newspaper articles, blogs and at social media websites. Is this true? On the one hand, the high-tech and biotech industries seem awash in patent litigation, and Congress, the FTC, and the Supreme Court are considering adopting a variety of reform measures. On the other hand, the availability of patents and the property rights they secure are driving  technological innovations once imagined only as science fiction - tablet computers, smart phones, genetically modified seeds, genetic testing for cancer, personalized medical treatments for debilitating diseases, and many others - and these technological marvels are now a commonplace feature of our lives.

A panel of distinguished jurists will discuss these two conflicting perspectives on whether the patent system today promotes or hampers innovation: Arthur Gajarsa, former Judge on the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Paul Michel, former Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and Richard Posner, Judge of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. The panel will be moderated by Douglas Ginsburg, former Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and a Professor of Law at George Mason University School of Law.

The panelists have combined many years of experience in adjudicating patent cases, writing and speaking on patent or IP policy, and engaging with legal and policy issues closely connected with the patent system, such as antitrust and law and economics. With wide-ranging views on the current health of the patent system and the relevant solutions, the panel discussion will be insightful and illuminating. The event is co-sponsored by the Center for the Protection of Intellectual Property at George Mason University School of Law and the Federalist Society's Intellectual Property Practice Group.

Featuring:

• Hon. Arthur J. Gajarsa, former Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
• Hon. Paul R. Michel, former Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
• Hon. Richard A. Posner, Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
• Hon. Douglas H. Ginsburg, Senior Circuit Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit and Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law - Moderator

Event details:

Start : Tuesday, May 14, 2013 12:00 PM

End   : Tuesday, May 14, 2013 2:00 PM

Location: National Press Club, 529 14th St. NW, Washington, DC

This event will be webcast live. 

Registration details:  Registration for this event is now closed. There is no cost to attent this event. Lunch will be included.  Please dial 202-822-8138 with any questions.

On May 1, 2013, the Federalist Society and the American Enterprise Institute are co-hosting a debate on shareholder value theory. Conventional wisdom holds that corporations should maximize shareholder value. In her new book The Shareholder Value Myth: How Putting Shareholders First Harms Investors, Corporations, and the Public, Lynn Stout argues that this is a harmful myth. According to Stout, shareholder value thinking leads managers to focus exclusively on short-term earnings to the detriment of investors, corporations, and the public.

According to Jonathan Macey, however, while shareholder value maximization may be a myth, it helpfully constrains corporate managers. Leaving corporate managers with unconstrained choices — the real result of Stout's argument — would be far more dangerous.   

Join Macey and Stout as they debate shareholder value thinking and its implications for the corporate community, public policy arena, and public. Here are the details:

At the Volokh Conspiracy, Professor Nick Rosenkranz of Georgetown Law draws attention to an exciting event tomorrow:

With the recent passing of Judge Robert Bork, the Federalist Society is hosting a special D.C. Luncheon featuring Senator Michael Lee. Speakers will celebrate Judge Bork’s life and legacy, and discuss his just-published final book Saving Justice: Watergate, the Saturday Night Massacre, and Other Adventures of a Solicitor General.

Here are the details.  Please note that the location is different from the usual location for Federalist Society luncheons.

Start : Friday, March 15, 2013 12:00 PM

End   : Friday, March 15, 2013 2:00 PM

Location: The Mayflower Hotel, 1127 Connecticut Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20036

Registration details:

The cost to attend is $50.

Space is limited, so please register online now. Please call (202) 822-8138 with any questions. If interested in purchaing a table, please contact Juli Nix at juli.nix@fed-soc.org.

For anyone planning on attending the 32nd Annual Federalist Society Student Symposium, "The Federal Leviathan," at the University of Texas School of Law, we have a special request.

It would be incredibly helpful if you could book your hotels today. The deadline for discounted rates at the Hilton Austin ends today, so please make sure to book now rather than later! Booking today will ensure your discounted rate.

We have made arrangements for special discounted prices on hotel, rooms, but you must book by January 31. Arrangements for room blocks with the Hilton Austin (500 E. 4th St.; 512-482-8000) and the Hilton Garden Inn (500 N IH 35; 512-480-8181). Room blocks are reserved under Federalist Society Student Symposium. Shuttles will run from these hotels to the events on campus.

Tomorrow January 26 FedSoc is hosting its 2013 Annual Western Chapters Conference at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California.  Here are the details:

Start : Saturday, January 26, 2013 10:00 AM

End   : Saturday, January 26, 2013 4:00 PM

Location:
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
40 Presidential Drive
Simi Valley, CA 93065
(In the Presidential Learning Center)

Agenda:

Panel One: Are Vouchers and Charter Schools Viable Alternatives to Public Schools?
10:30 a.m. – 12:15 Noon
Parental and community support for school choice has increased dramatically in recent years, with vouchers, charter schools, home schooling, and other educational alternatives all garnering greater support. Supporters cite gains in reading levels and higher graduation rates amongst reasons why school choice improves education outcomes for low-income, inner-city students. They also cite the importance of offering the same choice in education that higher income families are able to provide. What impediments stand in the way of implementing school choice? How large of a factor is union opposition to school choice? Are unions correct in asserting that vouchers take resources away from the public school system and are financially unaccountable? What about charters? Recently, the California Supreme Court decision upheld the rights of charter schools not to be controlled by the union’s collective bargaining agreements. Will this lead to an increased number of charter schools? How does the national school choice movement encourage reform in California? What trends or alternatives may arise in the future? A panel of experts will discuss these questions and will offer their assessment of school choice programs a decade after Zelman v. Simmons-Harrisopened the door for school choice programs.

Prof. Julian Betts, Department of Economics, University of California, San Diego
Clint Bolick, Vice President for Litigation, The Goldwater Institute
Prof. Bruce Fuller, Professor, Education and Public Policy, University of California, Berkeley
William R. Maurer, Executive Director, Institute for Justice Washington Chapter (IJ-WA)
Gloria Romero, Democrats for Education Reform and former Democratic Majority Leader, California State Senate (2001-08)
Hon. Carlos Bea, U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit (Moderator)

Panel Two: Recent Lawsuits Challenging Tenure and Pure-Seniority Based Layoffs
12:15 p.m. – 2:15 p.m.
Recent lawsuits have been filed in California challenging the state’s system of tenure and pure-seniority based layoffs. Students Matter recently filed a lawsuit in California seeking to overturn the rules governing the tenure system, which require schools to decide after 18 months whether a teacher deserves tenure, before a performance has been fully documented; to lay off teachers based almost solely on seniority; and to go through a protracted appeals process before laying off a teacher for poor performance. These lawsuits follow earlier suits concerning barring seniority-based lawsuits and the use of student performance in teacher reviews. How will this litigation affect education reform in California? Do other legal impediments stand in the way of a student receiving a quality education? How will the California’s teachers union affect these lawsuits? Do unions impede efforts to remove poor performing teachers, or are they a needed safeguard to ensure both a quality education for students and professional rights for educators?

Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr., Gibson Dunn & Crutcher
Jeremy Rosen, Horvitz & Levy
Richard J. Schwab, Trygstad, Schwab & Trygstad
Judge Andrew Guilford, U.S. District Court, Central District of California (Moderator)

Same-Sex Marriage Debate
2:30 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.

Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr., Gibson Dunn & Crutcher
Prof. John Eastman, Chapman University School of Law

Registration details:

Cost:
$50 for on-site registration.
4.0 hours of California CLE is also available for an additional $20.00.
Free for students, but you must pre-register.

Views and opinions expressed by the Federalist Society are not necessarily shared by the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Foundation.

On January 14, the Federalist Society will be hosting Arkansas Rep. Ted Cotton at its monthly D.C. lunch.  Here are the details:

Start : Monday, January 14, 2013 12:00 PM

End   : Monday, January 14, 2013 1:30 PM

Location: Tony Cheng's Restaurant, 619 H Street NW, Washington, DC

Registration details:

The cost is $15.00 for members and $20.00 for guests. Space is limited, so please register online now. Please call (202) 822-8138 with any questions.

Tomorrow, December 12, 2012, FedSoc's Criminal Law and Procedure Practice Group is hosting a Teleforum on cybersecurity. Here are the details:

Start : Tuesday, December 11, 2012 2:00 PM

End   : Tuesday, December 11, 2012 3:00 PM

Computer hacking is a large and growing problem, with no signs of abating as the world continues to modernize.  Static defenses like firewalls and encryption are helpful but not foolproof.  Experts seem to disagree as to whether the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1996 permits a hacked individual or entity to “hack back,” that is, go on the offense and attack the attacking computer.  The Department of Justice has taken the position that hacking back itself violates the law, while some notable experts assert that hacking back in self defense is permissible.  Join our experts as they discuss the legal limits.

Featuring:

• Hon. Stewart A. Baker, Steptoe & Johnson LLP and former Assistant U.S. Secretary for Policy, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
• Mr. Prof. Orin S. Kerr, The George Washington University Law School

Agenda:

Call begins at 2:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

Registration details:

Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up here. 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.

The 15th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference will be held on January 4-5, 2013 in New Orleans. The purpose of our Annual Faculty Conferences is to provide an opportunity for those interested in the Society to share ideas and scholarship with each other. You can find more information, as well as RSVP, at this link.  Here is the agenda, which includes a visit by Justice Antonin Scalia:

Friday, January 4, 2013

Panel 1: Roundtable on Judicial Deference v. Judicial Engagement
1:00 p.m. - 2:30 p.m.
Location: Bacchus Room

• Prof. Elizabeth Price Foley, Florida International University College of Law
• Prof. Chrisopher Green, University of Mississippi School of Law
• Prof. Joshua Hawley, University of Missouri School of Law
• Prof. Lee Strang, University of Toledo College of Law
• Moderator: Randy Barnett, Georgetown University Law Center

Young Legal Scholars Paper Presentations  
2:45 p.m. – 4:45 p.m.
Location: Bacchus Room

• Papers - to be announced
• Commenter: Prof. Michael McConnell, Stanford Law School
• Commenter: Prof. James Lindgren, Northwestern University School of Law
• Moderator: Prof. Eugene Volokh, UCLA School of Law

Seven-Minute Presentations of Works in Progress - Part I
5:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
Location: Bacchus Room

Reception
6:00 p.m. – 7:30 p.m.
Location: Rex Room 

• Hon. Antonin Scalia, United States Supreme Court (featured guest)

Saturday, January 5, 2013

Panel 3: Dodd Frank
8:30 a.m. - 10:00 a.m.
Location: Bacchus Room

• Prof. Geoffrey Miller, New York University School of Law
• Prof. David Skeel, University of Pennsylvania Law School
• Mr. Adam White, Boyden Gray & Associates
• Moderator: Prof. Todd Henderson, University of Chicago Law School

Seven-Minute Presentations of Works in Progress - Part II
10:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.
Location: Bacchus Room

• Moderator: Prof. John McGinnis, Northwestern University School of Law

Luncheon Debate: Resolved: Congress's Enumerated Powers Cannot be Increased by Treaty
Co-sponsored by the American Society of International Law
11:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.
Location: Rex Room

• Prof. David Golove, New York University School of Law (invited)
• Prof. Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Georgetown University Law Center
• Moderator: Ms. Elizabeth Andersen, Executive Director & Executive Vice President, American Society of International Law

Extraordinary and sometimes crippling levels of debt have plagued American states in recent years. State officials are often bound by inherited obligations to their citizens and employees and frequently lack the resources to meet those demands. David A. Skeel Jr., a University of Pennsylvania law professor, suggests an innovative solution to the issue: enacting a bankruptcy law for states to restructure and resolve unsustainable state debts.

Critics, however, raise a number of concerns: Could a state bankruptcy impair bond markets? Is this an attempt to evade pension obligations to public employees? Would subjecting state finances to federal trustee supervision violate state sovereignty and principles of federalism?  

Join the Federalist Society and AEI in this vigorous debate growing out of When States Go Broke: The Origins, Context, and Solutions for the American States in Fiscal Crisis, a just-released collection of essays edited by Skeel and Peter Conti-Brown.

Panelists:

Michael S. Greve, George Mason University School of Law and AEI
E.J. McMahon, Manhattan Institute
David A. Skeel, Jr., University of Pennsylvania Law School

Start : Thursday, November 8, 2012 4:30 PM
End   : Thursday, November 8, 2012 6:00 PM

Registration details: Please register through the American Enterprise Institute's event webpage. There is no charge for this even

Does the Media Oversimplify Gender Issues? Tomorrow, Thursday October 11, 2012 from 12:00pm-2:00pm, the Federalist Society's Civil Rights Practice Group and the Committee for Justice sponsor a discussion on the topic at the National Press Club in Washington, DC.  The event is free and lunch will be served.  Register at http://www.fed-soc.org/events/detail/ledbetter-and-beyond-does-the-media-oversimplify-gender-issues 

Meanwhile, Kathleen Parker writes on that same issue in today's Washington Post:

How many years of the woman have we had? Let me count.

To the extent that women’s votes count more than men’s, it’s been the year of the woman since at least 1964 — when women began outvoting men.

In 2008, 10 million more women than men voted, according to the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University.

The operative assumption, obviously, is that women pick winners and losers as a voting bloc. Nothing could be further from the truth.

It is true that more women are trending toward Barack Obama than Mitt Romney. But this owes only partly to the usual “women’s issues.” And it is, potentially, temporary.

Thanks to certain outspoken members/supporters of the GOP, the Democratic Party has been able to capitalize on a fiction created by the Obama campaign — the alleged “war on women.” It is not helpful when people such as Rush Limbaugh call Sandra Fluke a “slut” for her position that insurance should cover contraception. Then there was Todd Akin’s strange intelligence that victims of “legitimate rape” don’t get pregnant, a flourish of rare ignorance. Check the birthrates in countries where rape is employed as a weapon. Finally, some Republican-led states have waved one too many ultrasound wands at women.

While these incidents and anecdotes provide handy faces for dart practice, they constitute a war on women only if all women find these positions reprehensible. And only if allwomen care more about contraception and reproductive rights above all other issues, which is not the case.

This also happens to be the year of the fiscal cliff, when automatic spending cuts take effect at the same time Bush-era tax breaks expire. It’s the fourth year of a $1 trillion budget deficit. It is a year that the number of unemployed Americans is still too high and economic recovery too slow.

It is also the year that al-Qaeda caught its breath and began gaining traction again, and when terrorists murdered one of our ambassadors. It is another year when America’s standing as the world’s brightest light continues to dim, and that the Arab Spring descended into an extremist winter.

These are things that women care about, too.

Women, in other words, recognize the gravity of the problems this nation faces and are likely to pick a candidate based on these issues rather than on a party’s platform on abortion and contraception.

In fact, women, who are not a monolithic group any more than men are, don’t really rank reproductive issues at the top of their concerns. A recent Kaiser Family Foundation survey found that fewer than 1 percent of respondents mentioned women’s health or birth control as top election-year issues. On access to birth control and abortion, attitudes tend to reflect party affiliation rather than gender. A USA Today-Gallup poll this year found that women split on abortion in numbers comparable to the country as a whole, which is 49 percent to 45 percent favoring abortion rights.

Topping women’s concerns are the same things that are men’s highest concerns: the economy and jobs. The smartest candidate will recognize this sooner rather than later.

In Virginia’s Senate race between former governors Tim Kaine and George Allen, Kaine, the Democrat, has tried to merge the issues. Abortion and birth control are fundamentally economic issues, he says. Few seem to recall that, in one of the early Republican primary debates, Romney responded to a question about contraception as follows: “It’s working just fine. Just leave it alone.”

This doesn’t sound like a call to arms against women.

When subsequently asked what he thought about the gender gap, Romney said he wished that his wife, Ann, were there to answer the question. Romney benefits greatly from his better half, as he would put it, but he errs in thinking a woman would do a better job answering the question than would a man.

Women do not require special handling because, for the most part, they do not think of themselves first or primarily as women. (This is big news for those men who failed to take note.)

Women think of themselves as breadwinners and job-seekers. They think of themselves as parents who want good schools and enough money to send their kids to college. They think of themselves as Americans who worry about national security and the nation’s image abroad.

These are the issues that matter to women, the vast majority of whom will cast their votes accordingly. How about we ditch the gender nonsense and declare this the year of the American?

Five years ago, in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire Corporation, the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted Section VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as barring gender employment discrimination cases based on events older than 180 days, determining that paychecks received by an employee after the alleged discriminatory action did not constitute renewed acts of alleged discrimination. After Ledbetter, Congress amended the Civil Rights Act to provide that the 180 day statute of limitations resets with each paycheck. Since then, gender issues have taken an increasingly important role in discussions of law and policy. What are the true implications of the Ledbetter case? Has it been used, perhaps opportunistically or disingenuously, by either side in this debate? Have gender issues in general been mis-used in the same way? On October 11, 2012, FedSoc's Civil Rights Practice Group will be hosting a panel on these issues.  Here are the details:

Start : Thursday, October 11, 2012 12:00 PM

End   : Thursday, October 11, 2012 2:00 PM

Location: National Press Club, 529 14th Street NW, Washington, DC

Featuring:

• Ms. Jennifer Braceras, Columnist and former Commissioner, United States Commission on Civil Rights
• Ms. Fatima Goss-Graves, Vice President for Education and Employment, National Women’s Law Center
• Ms. Marcia Greenberger, Co-President, National Women’s Law Center
• Ms. Sabrina Schaeffer, Executive Director, Independent Women’s Forum

Registration details: There is no cost for this event. Lunch will be served. Please be sure to register for this event since space is limited.

In the past few years, various states, citing voter fraud and other concerns, have passed legislation that, among other things, require some form of approved identification to vote. The provisions of these statutes and their identification requirements vary. Critics argue, however, that they are unified at least to the extent that they will disproportionately disenfranchise minorities, elderly and poor people, asserting that they are less likely to have the required ID and least likely to obtain the required form of ID with ease. Furthermore, critics assert that there is no form of significant voter fraud that ID requirements would address. Our experts will debate the merits of the statutes and the arguments about voter fraud. Here are the details:

Start : Wednesday, October 3, 2012 12:00 PM

End   : Wednesday, October 3, 2012 2:00 PM

Location: National Press Club, 529 14th Street NW, Washington, DC

Featuring:

• Mr. John Fund, National Affairs Columnist, National Review
• Ms. Elizabeth B. Wydra, Chief Counsel, Constitutional Accountability Center
• Moderator: Mr. John Samples, Director, Center for Representative Government, The Cato Institute

Registration details: There is no cost for this event. Lunch will be served. Please be sure to register for this event as space is limited.

UPDATE: This teleforum has been postponed.

Tomorrow September 2th, FedSoc's International & National Security Law Practice Group and the Free Speech & Election Law Practice Group is sponsoring a teleforum on "Free Speech, International Law, and the Impact of Violence Against U.S. Diplomatic Missions Abroad."

Since a recent series of riots and violent attacks, the U.S. has shut down some of its embassies and consulates in the Middle East.  The worst of these attacks resulted in the death of U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.  Many, including members of the U.S. government, have blamed the attacks on a film made by a U.S. filmmaker, for which a trailer was posted on YouTube.  Should the violent reaction to a U.S. film cause us to rethink the nature of free speech protections for hate speech in the U.S.?  Should the U.S. government more aggressively defend the free speech protections under the U.S. Constitution in the global community?

Here are the details for the call:

Start : Tuesday, September 25, 2012 12:00 PM

End   : Tuesday, September 25, 2012 1:00 PM

Featuring:

    Prof. Julian Ku, Professor of Law and Faculty Director of International Programs, Hofstra University School of Law
    Prof. Peter J. Spiro, Charles R. Weiner Professor of Law, Temple University Beasley School of Law

Agenda: Call begins at 12:00 noon Eastern Time.

Registration details: Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up here. 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.

October 1st marks the first day of the 2012 Supreme Court Term. Thus far the Court's docket includes major cases about affirmative action, international law and the alien tort statute, national security, criminal law, and others.  Notable cases include Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, concerning the Equal Protection Clause and a public university's use of race in undergraduate admissions; Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, about the application of the Alien Tort Statute to human rights abuses abroad, and whether the statute covers corporations; Clapper v. Amnesty International USA, regarding the right to challenge the constitutionality of a global terrorism wiretapping program; Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds, concerning the proof that investors need to pursue a securities fraud claim by class-action lawsuit; and Florida v. Harris and Florida v. Jardines, about police use of a drug-sniffing dog to search the exterior of a private residence under the Fourth Amendment, and whether a dog’s “alert” constitutes probable cause for search of a private vehicle.  The Court is also likely to add other significant cases, including potentially a case filed by proponents of California’s “Proposition 8” challenge, which now has a certiorari petition pending. In addition to these cases and others, the panelists will discuss the current composition and the future of the Court, a particularly timely topic in light of the upcoming presidential election. On September 27th, the Federalist Society is holding its October Term 2012 preview.  Here are the details:

Start : Thursday, September 27, 2012 12:00 PM

End   : Thursday, September 27, 2012 2:30 PM

Location: National Press Club, 529 14th Street NW, Washington, DC 20045

Featuring:

• Mr. Tom Goldstein, Founding Partner, Goldstein & Russell P.C.
• Prof. Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center
• Ms. Carrie Severino, Chief Counsel and Policy Director, Judicial Crisis Network
• Mr. Stuart Taylor, Contributing Editor, National Journal
• Hon. Kenneth L. Wainstein, Partner, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft
• Moderator: Mr. Pete Williams, NBC News Justice Correspondent

Registration details:

The cost to attend this event is $25. Lunch will be included. There is no cost for Press.

Please register online as space is limited.