333 W Harbor Dr
San Diego, CA 92101
The 24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference will take place on January 5-6, 2023 in San Diego, CA. The conference takes place under the general aegis of the AALS Annual Meeting, with our events and speakers cross-listed in the AALS Annual Meeting Program. Panels and meals are to be held in the Marriott Marquis San Diego Marina. The cut-off date to register in our rooming block is December 20th, although it is likely to fill up sooner!
Please contact Nick Garfinkel ([email protected]) with any questions or concerns!
Thursday, January 5th
Welcome: 11:45 am - 12:00 pm
Luncheon Debate: Resolved: The Major Questions Doctrine Has No Place in Statutory Interpretation 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm
7 Minute Presentations of Works in Progress Panel 1-A 3:00 pm - 4:15 pm
7 Minute Presentations of Works in Progress Panel 1-B 3:00 pm - 4:15 pm
Welcome Remarks by AALS President-Elect, Dean Mark Alexander 4:30 pm - 4:45 pm
Panel: Election Law in Flux 4:45 pm - 6:30 pm
Reception: Co-sponsored with the Institute for Humane Studies 6:30 pm - 7:30 pm
Friday, January 6th
Breakfast 8:00 am - 9:00 am
Panel: Politicization of the Economy 9:00 am - 10:45 am
7 Minute Presentations of Works in Progress Panel 2-A 11:00 am - 12:00 pm
7 Minute Presentations of Works in Progress Panel 2-B 11:00 am - 12:00 pm
Panel: Dobbs & the Rule of Law (lunch included) 12:15 pm - 2:30 pm
Young Legal Scholars Paper Presentation 2:45 - 4:45 pm
Panel: America and Her Discontents 5:00 pm - 6:30 pm
Back to top
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
In West Virginia v. EPA, decided this last term, the Supreme Court invoked the major questions doctrine to reject EPA's claim that the Clean Air Act granted it the authority effectivaly to require power plants to shift from generating electricity through coal to doing so through natural gas, wind, or solar sources. Should the doctrine continue to play a role in the interpretation of federal statutes? Is the major questions doctrine consistent with textualism? How does it relate to the nondelegation doctrine? Does it really protect congressional primacy in policymaking, or is it cover for deregulatory gridlock and the imposition of the judiciary's policy preferences?
Featuring:
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
Featuring:
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
Featured:
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
Featuring
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
Election law has attracted increasing academic and judicial scrutiny in recent years, with topics of concern ranging from the scope of the Voting Rights Act and the meaning of materiality in certain protections provided by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, to state regulation of absentee ballots and the limits of state legislative and judicial authority with respect to redistricting. This panel will discuss these and related developments.
Featured:
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
The role of our democratically responsive institutions—and the legislature in particular—is increasingly performed by private economic actors and independent financial regulators willing to use their influence over capital to steer economic life pursuant to a set of politically charged values. Large firms, perhaps in response to customer demand or managerial preferences, attempt to influence a range of public policies, from gun rights to religious liberty to climate, now as a matter of common course. Financial institutions have become reluctant to lend to oil and gas companies. Financial regulators such as the Federal Reserve and the SEC have given tailwinds to these actions by requiring firms to consider climate risk when making business decisions. According to some, these steps are needed in light of Congress’s reluctance to address pressing social issues. According to others, contemporary congressional inertia is a feature of our system of separated powers and mixing economic and social justice issues is inconsistent with bedrock principles of free-market capitalism. This panel will consider the relationship between the economy, economic regulators, and the use of economic power to regulate social issues and influence public policy.
Featuring:
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
Featuring:
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
Featuring:
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
This past June, the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overruled Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, holding that the Constitution does not protect a right to abortion. Critics argue that the Court’s decision to overrule precedents that have been in place for decades and that many took for granted poses a grave threat to the rule of law. Supporters argue that Roe’s declaration of a right to abortion ungrounded in constitutional text or in historical practice was a judicial usurpation that required correction. This panel will discuss these and related issues.
Featuring:
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
Featuring:
24th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference
Featuring: