『FedSoc Forums』のカバーアート

FedSoc Forums

FedSoc Forums

著者： The Federalist Society
無料で聴く

*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:

  • 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.Copyright The Federalist Society 政治・政府 政治学
エピソード
  • Litigation Update: Ten Commandments in Public Schools

    Litigation Update: Ten Commandments in Public Schools
    2026/05/12


    This week, the en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that a Texas law requiring public schools to display a copy of the Ten Commandments in classrooms does not violate the First Amendment's Establishment or Free Exercise Clauses. The court explained that Stone v. Graham, which relied upon the now-defunct Lemon test to invalidate a similar Kentucky law decades ago, is no longer controlling. In the place of Lemon and its progeny, the en banc court explained, courts must ask whether a challenged law resembles a founding-era religious establishment. The court also held the challengers here failed to show the law substantially burdened their free exercise. Join us for a litigation update breaking down this ruling and what it may hold for Establishment and Free Exercise cases in the future.


    Featuring:



    Prof. Stephanie Barclay, Professor of Law and Faculty Director for the Georgetown Center for the Constitution, Georgetown University Law Center
    Prof. Andrew Koppelman, John Paul Stevens Professor of Law, Northwestern University School of Law
    (Moderator) Joe Davis, Senior Counsel, The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty
    続きを読む 一部表示
    57 分
  • How Does the First Amendment Protect Churches in Court?

    How Does the First Amendment Protect Churches in Court?
    2026/05/12
    The First Amendment’s church autonomy doctrine sets a structural constitutional barrier keeping the State from interfering in certain matters of a church. While the doctrine’s roots go deeper than even the nation’s Founding, how exactly it protects churches has recently and sharply divided courts. Some courts say it provides broad protections for matters falling within its scope—barring not only liability for removing a wayward minister, but also entangling and distracting litigation into the merits of that minister’s claims. But other courts—over a chorus of dissenting colleagues—have narrowed church autonomy to barring liability only. This has many important implications, including whether there can be a right of appeal when trial courts deny church autonomy defenses and send cases to entangling merits adjudication. The Supreme Court has been asked to clarify the contours of this doctrine in a case stemming from a class action lawsuit against the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops that challenges how the Catholic Church has described and used Peter's Pence, an offering that has been given to the Pope for over 1,000 years.
    Join us as a panel of experts explore the future of the church autonomy doctrine and what may unfold if the Supreme Court takes up the pending case concerning Peter's Pence.

    Featuring:


    Branton Nestor, Associate Attorney, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
    Prof. Lael Weinberger, Assistant Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
    (Moderator) Prof. Michael W. McConnell, Richard and Frances Mallery Professor of Law and Faculty Director, Constitutional Law Center, Stanford Law School
    続きを読む 一部表示
    59 分
  • Originalism and State Constitutions

    Originalism and State Constitutions
    2026/05/12
    Originalism has quickly become the leading approach to interpreting the U.S. Constitution, drawing from the work of Justice Antonin Scalia and others over the past three decades. But what place does originalism have in the states? State constitutions often contain unique provisions that have no federal analogue. Take Alaska's unique constitutional provision empowering grand juries to investigate matters of public welfare and safety and to issue reports. This power falls outside the traditional role grand juries play and raises interesting questions. Recent scholarship published by the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy explores the text, history, and tradition behind this provision, offering a window into how originalism might operate differently at the state level. What lessons can be drawn about the similarities between originalist interpretation of state constitutions and the federal constitution? Does originalism look different from state to state and between state and federal governments? How might judges and scholars take up the originalist mantle and shed light on other underexplored state constitutional provisions? Join our panel of experts as they explore how originalism is playing out in the states.
    Featuring:

    Dr. Nicholas Cole, Senior Research Fellow, Pembroke College, University of Oxford; Director, the Quill Project
    Hon. Stephen Cox, Attorney General, Alaska
    Prof. Richard Garnett, Paul J. Schierl Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame Law School
    Savannah Shoffner, J.D. Candidate, Notre Dame Law School
    (Moderator) Hon. John D. Couriel, Justice, Florida Supreme Court
    (Introducer) Sean-Michael Pigeon, Editor-in-Chief, Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy
    続きを読む 一部表示
    53 分
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_c
まだレビューはありません