Necessary & Proper Podcast Podcast Por The Federalist Society arte de portada

Necessary & Proper Podcast

Necessary & Proper Podcast

De: The Federalist Society
Escúchala gratis

Necessary & Proper is the official podcast of the Federalist Society's Article I Initiative. The Framers of the Constitution intended the legislature to be the most powerful branch of government. In its present state, as the government operates on a day to day basis, it is not. Were the Founders simply wrong about the inherent powers of the legislative branch? Has the institution of Congress developed practices that are not compatible with the text of the Constitution? Why are current Congressional leaders unable or unwilling to act as an effective check on the presidency? Why is Congress unable to pass a budget? Why has Congress ceded much of its authority to the executive branch and to administrative agencies? What does it mean to serve productively as a member of the House or Senate? These and other important questions are the focus of the Article I Initiative. Periodic releases from Necessary & Proper will feature experts who can shed light on what the Framers envisioned for the legislative branch and how it can be restored to its proper place in the constitutional order.Copyright The Federalist Society Ciencia Política Política y Gobierno
Episodios
  • Necessary & Proper Episode 99: Defining Antisemitism: A Debate on Free Speech and Civil Rights

    Necessary & Proper Episode 99: Defining Antisemitism: A Debate on Free Speech and Civil Rights
    Aug 21 2025
    Congress is currently debating the Antisemitism Awareness Act. This proposed legislation aims to provide a clear definition of antisemitism for use in enforcing existing civil rights laws. Supporters argue that the bill is a crucial tool for combating rising antisemitism by filling a gap in current legal definitions. Opponents, however, contend that the bill could stifle free speech and limit criticism of Israel. Join the Federalist Society for a timely discussion on the legal and constitutional implications of this legislation, exploring the complexities of defining hate speech while upholding the principles of free expression.
    Featuring:

    William Creeley, Legal Director, Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE)
    Prof. Eugene Kontorovich, Professor of Law and Director, Center for the Middle East and International Law, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School
    (Moderator) Aharon Friedman, Special Counsel, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
    Más Menos
    1 h y 1 m
  • Necessary & Proper Episode 100: Legislative or Executive? The Curious Case of the Library of Congress

    Necessary & Proper Episode 100: Legislative or Executive? The Curious Case of the Library of Congress
    Aug 21 2025
    The recent dismissal of the Librarian of Congress and the Register of Copyrights by President Trump raises fundamental questions about the scope of the President’s removal authority and the constitutional status of these offices. Do these officials exercise executive power such that they must be removable at will? Or has Congress validly restricted removal in pursuit of independence?
    This panel will examine the legal and historical foundations of both positions, tracing the development of the Library of Congress and the Copyright Office, their placement within the legislative branch, and the President’s authority to remove them—if any. The discussion will examine whether these offices lie within the President’s removal authority or whether Congress has validly constrained that power.
    Our panel will consider the constitutional text, structural implications, and historical practice governing the removal of these unique officers.
    Featuring:

    Prof. Anne Joseph O'Connell, Adelbert H. Sweet Professor of Law, Stanford Law School
    Zvi Rosen, Associate Professor, UNH Franklin Pierce School of Law
    Devin Watkins, Attorney, Competitive Enterprise Institute
    [Moderator] Robert Rando, Partner, Patrick Doerr
    Más Menos
    1 h y 1 m
  • Necessary & Proper Episode 98: Courthouse Steps Decision: Federal Communications Commission v. Consumers’ Research

    Necessary & Proper Episode 98: Courthouse Steps Decision: Federal Communications Commission v. Consumers’ Research
    Aug 12 2025
    The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has traditionally regulated interstate and international communications and, as part of that, maintained a universal service fund that requires telecommunications carriers to contribute quarterly based on their revenues. In order to calculate these contribution amounts, the FCC contracts the help of the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC). The constitutionality of these delegations of power—to the FCC by Congress and to USAC by the FCC—were challenged in court by Consumers’ Research. On June 27, 2025, the Court ruled in favor of the FCC, rejecting the argument that the universal-service contribution scheme violates the nondelegation doctrine.
    Join this FedSoc Forum to discuss this case, its decision, and what this means for the nondelegation doctrine going forward.
    Featuring:

    Sean Lev, Partner, HWG LLP
    Moderator: Devin Watkins, Attorney, Competitive Enterprise Institute
    Más Menos
    45 m
Todavía no hay opiniones