Matthew R. A. Heiman
In a new teleforum, Professor Eric Goldman, Lindsey Tonsager, and moderator Professor Gus Hurwitz discuss the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA).
Read this articleAlex J. Pollock
In the light of the political reality of Federal Reserve history, a completely independent Fed looks impossible. In the light of the unknowable future, it looks undesirable.
Read this articleChristina Sandefur
Since our country’s founding, Americans have allowed guests to stay in their homes for short periods of time, often in exchange for doing chores or paying for dinner. Today, technology allows people to do this in ever more efficient ways—to allow guests to rent a room or a house for a week or a night at time.
Read this articleJ. Kennerly Davis, Jr.
A strong argument can be made that Senator Warren’s proposed wealth tax would be unconstitutional unless apportioned.
Read this articleWayne A. Abernathy
Richard J. Herring, professor at the Wharton School, is well known for his insightful commentary on the financial system. His paper on “The Evolving Complexity of Capital Regulation” is a good example of why. Professor Herring presents a readily accessible and remarkably concise history of the development of global standards for bank capital, starting with the first Basel Capital Accord (Basel I—regulators are now looking at the implementation of Basel IV). Then he walks through additions and amplifications under the Dodd-Frank Act and various regulatory innovations, each regulatory round designed to address perceived problems of previous standards.
Read this articleGeoffrey A. Manne
This complex case is about an overreaching federal agency seeking to set prices and dictate the business model of one of the world’s most innovative technology companies.
Read this articleAdam Gustafson
In the last days of 2018, EPA invited comment on a proposal (the revised Supplemental Cost Finding for the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards) that could change the way regulatory benefits are calculated for some of its biggest rules. The immediate reach of the proposal is narrow. But it raises important questions about the proper consideration of regulatory costs and benefits, and its implications should be considered carefully.
Read this articleSusan Dudley
According to my George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center colleague, Bridget Dooling, a lengthy federal shutdown threatens to derail President Trump’s deregulatory priorities. Not only are covered agencies unable to make progress on their deregulatory initiatives, but the portals for public notice and comment and the office that must review all regulations before they can be issued are caught up in the furlough.
Read this articleEileen J. O'Connor
Within a week of his inauguration, President Trump signed an Executive Order instructing his Administration to take action to keep his campaign promise to reduce government regulation. The EO requires federal agencies to eliminate two regulations for every one they issue, and to hold annual incremental cost of regulations to zero. How is his Administration delivering on those promises?
Read this articleDaniel Lungren, Donald Kochan, Patrick Parenteau, Richard Faulk, and John Baker
Originally Speaking is a written debate series that approaches a contemporary topic from diverse perspectives. The Federalist Society takes no position and encourages a clear and constructive exchange on the subject. Posts in an OS series chain off of each other in waves, creating a loose stream of dialogue.
The focus of this series is if climate change is eligible for common law public nuisance claims, as articulated in the lawsuits by CA and NY municipalities against several major oil and gas companies. We hope you enjoy this Originally Speaking series.
Read this article