Podcast
FedSoc Forums
Hosted by The Federalist Society · EN
*This series was formerly known as Teleforums.
FedSoc Forums is a virtual discussion series dedicated to providing expert analysis and intellectual commentary on today’s most pressing legal and policy issues. Produced by The Federalist Society’s Practice Groups, FedSoc Forum strives to create balanced conversations in various formats, such as monologues, debates, or panel discussions. In addition to regular episodes, FedSoc Forum features special content covering specific topics in the legal world, such as:
The Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.
FedSoc Forums is a virtual discussion series dedicated to providing expert analysis and intellectual commentary on today’s most pressing legal and policy issues. Produced by The Federalist Society’s Practice Groups, FedSoc Forum strives to create balanced conversations in various formats, such as monologues, debates, or panel discussions. In addition to regular episodes, FedSoc Forum features special content covering specific topics in the legal world, such as:
- Courthouse Steps: A series of rapid response discussions breaking down all the latest SCOTUS cases after oral argument or final decision
- A Seat at the Sitting: A monthly series that runs during the Court’s term featuring a panel of constitutional experts discussing the Supreme Court’s upcoming docket sitting by sitting
- Litigation Update: A series that provides the latest updates in important ongoing cases from all levels of government
The Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.
53episodes
Episodes
Newest firstAll episodes
Public Lands at the Founding
2d ago00:53:26Tap to summarizeIn this Federalist Society America 250 series, experts analyze modern legal and policy debates through the lens of the Founding generation. The Founders gave us the tools to answer many contemporary questions; join us as we explore those answers.From the Articles of Confederation's earliest days, the states disagreed about how to handle the budding nation’s westernmost territories. At the 1787 Philadelphia Convention, the Framers partially addressed these issues by providing the Property Clause in Article IV, Section 3. This granted Congress the “Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States[.]” Since then, the United States has acquired and retained hundreds of millions of acres of land, leaving large swaths of it unappropriated and in the hands of unelected federal administrators. Though the Supreme Court has interpreted Article I’s Necessary and Proper Clause to allow the federal government to hold property while furthering its enumerated powers, experts disagree over whether federal agencies violate the vertical separation of power by holding land within a state’s borders and exerting vast delegated powers over it. Join our panel of the foremost scholars and litigators of public lands as they explore the text, history, and purpose of the Property Clause, and whether the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Article IV, Section 3 has wreaked havoc on the Constitution’s otherwise narrow allowance for federal control of public lands.Featuring:Ethan Blevins, Senior Legal Fellow, Pacific Legal FoundationTony Francois, Partner, Briscoe Prows Kao Ivester & Bazel LLPProf. Richard Samuelson, Associate Professor of Government, Hillsdale College, Washington, D.C. Campus(Moderator) Hon. Ryan T. Holte, Judge, United States Court of Federal Claims; Distinguished Jurist-in-Residence Professor of Law, The University of Akron School of Law
Transcribe →What Was the Founders' Design for Intellectual Property?
3d ago00:51:52Tap to summarizeIn this Federalist Society America 250 series, experts analyze modern legal and policy debates through the lens of the Founding generation. The Founders gave us the tools to answer many contemporary questions; join us as we explore those answers.Innovation is at the heart of the American economy, fueled by a patent system that represented a deliberate radical break from the British model. Under English practice, the Crown granted patents as royal favors, monopolies awarded at the sovereign's pleasure, with no requirement of genuine novelty or utility. The Framers rejected this. They believed that intellectual property rights should both reward ingenuity and advance society. By drawing Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 almost verbatim from the South Carolina Constitution, they tied the grant of patents to the mandate to "promote the progress of science and the useful arts."This system democratized invention, where anyone could apply for a patent, and set the stage for centuries of American innovative dominance. The U.S. model has largely been adopted globally.As we approach the Semiquincentennial, join our panel to explore the inventive spirit unleashed after the Founding. How did the Constitution break with British common law? Why did the Framers embed IP rights in the Constitution itself rather than the Bill of Rights? What does it mean that the provision passed without recorded controversy? And how healthy are those rights today?Featuring:Prof. Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason UniversityProf. David S. Olson, Associate Professor, Boston College Law SchoolProf. Zvi Rosen, Associate Professor, UNH Franklin Pierce School of Law(Moderator) Hon. John D. Love, Magistrate Judge, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas
Transcribe →How Did State Constitutions Shape the American Founding?
5d ago00:57:15Tap to summarizeIn this Federalist Society America 250 series, experts analyze modern legal and policy debates through the lens of the Founding generation. The Founders gave us the tools to answer many contemporary questions; join us as we explore those answers.State constitutions were not afterthoughts to the Founding—they were the proving grounds that shaped and informed the United States Constitution. As America celebrates its 250th anniversary, this webinar will explore how these early charters both inspired our national framework and continue to operate as vital, independent safeguards of individual liberty. Discover why state constitutions remain essential pillars of federalism—protecting freedom not just in theory, but in practice.Featuring:Hon. Nels S.D. Peterson, Chief Justice, Supreme Court of GeorgiaTimothy Sandefur, Vice President for Legal Affairs, Goldwater InstituteHon. Jeffrey S. Sutton, Chief Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit(Moderator) Hon. Jennifer Perkins, Judge, Arizona Court of Appeals, Division One
Transcribe →What Can State and Federal Regulators Do to Control the Cost and Maintain the Reliability of Our Electric Service?
6d ago01:02:48Tap to summarizeAfter two decades of flat demand, US electricity demand is experiencing rapid growth. Demand is expected to increase 25% by 2030 and 78% by 2050, pushing up electricity prices as suppliers scramble to fund and construct massive amounts of new infrastructure. Average residential bills increased by nearly 30% from 2021 to 2025 and are expected to continue going up, adding to the inflation concerns of consumers. At the same time, public officials are issuing increasingly urgent warnings about growing risks to the reliability of the U.S. electric power system. Our nation’s technological progress, prosperity, and well-being depend on ever-expanding supplies of reliable and affordable electric power to meet rapidly growing demand from proliferating data centers and the expansion of other power-hungry enterprises. The causes that have inflated the price of electricity and threatened the reliability of electric service must be identified correctly and dealt with effectively. How have certain policy developments, including the deregulation movement, the expansion of federal regulation, and the push for decarbonization, affected the price of electricity and the reliability of electric service? Going forward, what changes in federal and state regulation would produce the greatest positive impact on the price of electricity and the reliability of electric service?Join us for a discussion of electric regulation covering these and other important questions featuring experts with decades of relevant experience. Featuring:Mark Curtis Christie, Founding Director of the Center for Energy Law and Policy, William & Mary Law School; Former Chairman, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; Former Chairman, Virginia State Corporation CommissionBernard L. McNamee, Former Commissioner, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission(Moderator) J. Kennerly Davis, Former Deputy Attorney General for Virginia
Transcribe →From the Courthouse Steps: Hikma v. Amarin
1w ago00:31:43Tap to summarizeIn Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA v. Amarin Pharma, the Supreme Court unanimously held that, to plausibly allege induced infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b), a complaint must identify words or conduct that affirmatively encourage infringement. Writing for the Court, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson explained that a generic manufacturer's label and public statements must do more than merely leave open the possibility that doctors might prescribe or pharmacists might dispense the drug for a patented indication.Join us for a webinar breaking down the ruling and its implications for patent litigation.Featuring:Prof. Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason UniversityWesley Weeks, Partner, Wiley Rein LLP
Transcribe →No Enemies to the Right? Antisemitism and the Big Tent
1w ago00:57:08Tap to summarizeFollowing the October 2023 terrorist attacks in Israel, reports of antisemitism have risen across America. In 2025, the U.S. Department of Education opened civil-rights investigations into dozens of colleges over their alleged failure to protect Jewish students.Debates over antisemitism, free speech, and the boundaries of political coalitions have become increasingly visible. Some have called on conservatives and libertarians to take a forceful stand against antisemitism and draw clearer lines against figures who refuse to do so. Others have grown skeptical of how antisemitism is defined and argue that supporters of Israel are squelching legitimate dissent.Are more proactive measures needed to combat antisemitism in America? When does coalition-building become moral evasion, and when does gatekeeping risk policing legitimate dissent? Join us for a timely and lively discussion of antisemitism, free speech, and the proper limits of the right’s “big tent.”Featuring:Dr. Jesse Merriam, Associate Professor of Government; Pre-Law Advisor, Patrick Henry CollegeJosh Blackman, Professor of Law, South Texas College of Law Houston(Moderator) Hon. Kenneth L. Marcus, Founder, Chairman, and CEO of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law
Transcribe →From the Courthouse Steps: FCC v. AT&T
1w ago00:29:40Tap to summarizeIn FCC v. AT&T, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a jury trial is required before the FCC may collect penalties from regulated parties for apparent violations of communication laws and regulations. The Supreme Court found that the FCC's administrative process does not offend the Seventh Amendment jury right – over the dissent of Justice Clarence Thomas. Join us for a webinar breaking down the ruling and its implications for other challenges to administrative enforcement regimes. Featuring: Thomas Berry, Director, Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies, Cato InstituteJosh Robbins, Attorney, Separation of Powers, Pacific Legal Foundation
Transcribe →How Did the Founders View the Role of Education?
2w ago00:56:21Tap to summarizeIn this Federalist Society America 250 series, experts analyze modern legal and policy debates through the lens of the Founding generation. The Founders gave us the tools to answer many contemporary questions; join us as we explore those answers.Education today looks radically different than it did at the Founding, but that may be changing. As America celebrates its 250th anniversary, this webinar will explore the government’s role in education during the Founding era, the subsequent 19th- and early 20th-century developments that upended the Founding-era tradition, and the body of Supreme Court precedent that continues to emerge from that upheaval. Is a return to tradition in the making?Featuring:Michael Bindas, Senior Attorney, Institute for JusticeProf. Nicole Stelle Garnett, John P. Murphy Foundation Professor of Law and Associate Dean for External Engagement, University of Notre Dame Law SchoolProf. Mark Storslee, Associate Professor and C. Boyden Gray Distinguished Scholar, University of North Carolina School of Law(Moderator) Shaka Mitchell, Senior Fellow, American Federation for Children
Transcribe →USPTO Examination Updates and Evolving Patent Eligibility Standards
3w ago01:01:43Tap to summarizeJoin us for a timely webinar examining the latest updates to the United States Patent and Trademark Office's examination policy under Director John Squires, with a focused look at how these changes are reshaping patent prosecution. Our panel will break down key shifts in examination practice—including updates to patent eligibility—and applicant strategies emerging in response, offering practical insights for navigating this evolving landscape. Designed for practitioners, in-house counsel, and policy observers alike, this discussion will highlight what matters most for day-to-day prosecution. Featuring: Dr. Julie Burke, Founder, IP Quality Pro, LLC Noel Egnatios, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Legal Officer, DivX Eli Mazour, Of Counsel, Foley & Lardner LLP Clint Mehall, Partner, Davidson Kappel LLC (Moderator) John M. Rogitz, Managing Attorney, Rogitz & Associates
Transcribe →What Was an "Establishment of Religion" at the Founding?
4w ago00:52:02Tap to summarizeIn this Federalist Society America250 series, experts analyze modern legal and policy debates through the lens of the Founding generation. The Founders gave us the tools to answer many contemporary questions; join us as we explore those answers.In 2022, the Supreme Court overruled the "Lemon Test" for interpreting the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, holding that the Clause must instead be interpreted by reference to "historical practices and understandings." To do this, the Court suggested it would look to certain historical "hallmarks of religious establishments the framers sought to prohibit when they adopted the First Amendment." This has kicked off a vigorous debate, in both caselaw and scholarship, about what constituted "an establishment of religion" at the time of the Founding, and how that history should inform interpretation of the Establishment Clause today. Join a gathering of the foremost scholars and litigators of the Establishment Clause to discuss the Clause's historical meaning both as a matter of originalist theory and in its application to current church-state controversies, such as displays of the Ten Commandments in public schools.Featuring:Joe Davis, Senior Counsel, The Becket Fund for Religious LibertyDouglas Laycock, Robert E. Scott Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus, University of Virginia; Alice McKean Young Regents Chair in Law Emeritus, University of TexasMichael McConnell, Richard and Frances Mallery Professor of Law, Stanford Law School(Moderator) Hon. Ryan D. Nelson, Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Transcribe →