RTP's Fourth Branch Podcast

The Supreme Court is now hearing the most closely watched environmental case in decades, which may decide the future of greenhouse gas regulation under the Clean Air Act. This case has already been the subject of an unprecedented Supreme Court stay that short-circuited the Obama administration's climate agenda and not one, but two, 7+ hour arguments before the D.C. Circuit. Jonathan Brightbill and Kevin Poloncarz, who argued the case before the D.C. Circuit, joined us to discuss what it means for the future of climate regulation and administrative law.Under the Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency regulates greenhouse gas emissions from various sources including new cars and new industrial sources. But a large proportion of the country's greenhouse gas emissions come from existing sources, such as the nation's coal and natural gas power plants, which provide over half of American electricity.In 2015, the Obama administration issued a regulation for existing fossil fuel power plants under Clean Air Act §111(d), which allows the EPA to “establish a procedure” for each state to adopt “standards of performance” for existing sources of air pollutants. The administration called this rule the "Clean Power Plan." It was controversial, in part, because it went beyond asking states to make their existing power plants run more efficiently. Instead, it went "beyond the fenceline" of the power plant to encourage non-fossil sources of electricity such as wind and solar power and shrink the fossil-fuel power sector.The Clean Power Plan never went into effect because the Supreme Court stayed its implementation on February 9, 2016. The D.C. Circuit heard more than 7 hours of argument on the validity of the Clean Power Plan but never ruled on it because the Trump administration repealed it and replaced it with its own rule, which it called the "Affordable Clean Energy Rule," and was limited to promoting efficiency measures at existing fossil fuel plants. The D.C. Circuit then heard 9 more hours of argument on this new rule, before striking it down on January 19, 2021. The court held that EPA's authority was not so limited.The Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether Clean Air Act §111(d) gives "the EPA authority not only to impose standards based on technology and methods that can be applied at and achieved by that existing source, but also allows the agency to develop industry-wide systems like cap-and-trade regimes." The case is an important sequel in the Court's lines of cases on how much deference executive agencies should receive to decide major questions of policy and whether Congress might authorize dramatic agency action from relatively obscure provisions—hiding an elephant in a mousehole.Featuring:- Jonathan Brightbill, Partner, Winston & Strawn LLP- Kevin Poloncarz, Partner, Covington & Burling LLP- [Moderator] James W. Coleman, Robert G. Storey Distinguished Faculty Fellow and Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of LawVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Health policy expert Jeff Stier joins the podcast to discuss all things concerning the regulation of e-cigarettes and vapes: How did the FDA get the authority to regulate tobacco in the first place? What is synthetic nicotine, and what might its developement demonstrate about the interplay between federal agencies and their statutory authority? What are the most recent FDA actions in this area, and what is likely to come next?In June Jeff narrated an Explainer video on the same topic, which you can view here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2_brl2u9g0Featuring:- Jeff Stier, Senior Fellow, Consumer Choice CenterVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

The last few months have seen significant changes at the Federal Trade Commission. The new FTC has set an ambitious agenda that revives the agency, propelling it in directions we haven’t previously seen. The FTC is poised to engage in wide-ranging antitrust and consumer protection investigations, issue industry-wide rules, and blend antitrust and consumer missions for a better outcome. Featuring: Adam Cella, Attorney Advisor, Office of Hon. Christine Wilson, Federal Trade Commission Debbie Feinstein, Partner and Chair, Global Antitrust, Arnold & Porter Jessica Rich, Of Counsel, Kelley Drye; former Director, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission [Moderator] Svetlana Gans, Former Chief of Staff, Federal Trade Commission Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

The FTC is undertaking an ambitious and historic effort to craft de novo competition and privacy rules that will impact the entire U.S. economy. While some have applauded FTC's efforts, others have questioned the FTC's statutory authority to craft such rules. This webinar featured a panel of experts discussing the agency's statutory authority, processes and procedures, and specific rules that may be in play.Featuring:- Corbin Barthold, Director of Appellate Litigation and Internet Policy Counsel, TechFreedom- William Blumenthal, Partner, Sidley Austin LLP- Andrew Stivers, Associate Director, NERA Economic Consulting- [Moderator] Svetlana Gans, Vice President & Associate General Counsel, NCTAVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

On June 25, 2021, President Biden's newly appointed Housing Secretary Marcia Fudge proposed to rescind a Secretary Carson-era disparate impact rule designed to implement the Fair Housing Act. In its place, HUD would reinstate the 2013 Discriminatory Effect Standard because the 2013 rule "better states Fair Housing Act jurisprudence and is more consistent with the Fair Housing Act's remedial purposes." By the time notice and comment ended on August 24, 2021, over ten thousand public comments had been submitted.Critics of Secretary Fudge's proposed rule, including Ranking Member Senator Pat Toomey, argue that the change not only flouts the Supreme Court's decision in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities but also ultimately hurt consumers. Proponents argue that the change will move the housing market towards greater equity. Our panel of experts with a diversity of views discussed the pros and cons on October 11, 2021.Featuring:- Paul Compton, Founding Partner, Compton Jones Dresher- Morgan Williams, General Counsel, National Fair Housing Alliance- [Moderator] Devon Westhill, President and General Counsel, Center for Equal OpportunityVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

In this episode, Professor David Hyman interviews Dr. Richard Williams about Dr. Williams' new book, "Fixing Food: An FDA Insider Unravels the Myths and Solutions."A twenty-seven-year veteran of the FDA's Center for Food Safety and Nutrition, Dr. Williams questions the accuracy of more than thirty years of food labeling, along with consumer education on diet/disease relationships and failed attempts to get consumers to track intakes.Featuring:- Dr. Richard A. Williams, Former Associate Director for Social Sciences, FDA; Author, "Fixing Food: An FDA Insider Unravels the Myths and Solutions"- [Moderator] David Hyman, Scott K. Ginsburg Professor of Health Law & Policy, Georgetown University Law CenterVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance (ESG) investing is growing in popularity, especially after major investment firm BlackRock signaled support for what it called "ESG Integration," or the practice of incorporating material ESG information into investment and divestment decisions. However, since this strategy is relatively young, the short–and long–term merits and potential harm to investors are both unclear.A distinguished panel joins us to discuss a new paper, titled "Corporate Collusion" and written by former U.S. Ambassador and White House Counsel C. Boyden Gray, and to offer their differing views on the legal issues involved, including ESG, ERISA requirements, fiduciary duty, and more.Featuring:- David J. Berger, Partner, Wilson Sonsini- Hon. C. Boyden Gray, Founding Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates- Hon. Hester Peirce, Commissioner, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission- Hon. Leo E. Strine, Jr., Of Counsel, Wachtell Lipton; former Chief Justice, Delaware Supreme Court- [Moderator] Hon. Paul S. Atkins, Chief Executive Officer, Patomak Global Partners; former Commissioner, U.S. Securities and Exchange CommissionVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, federal and state governments relaxed rules that limit telemedicine—technology that enables people to access healthcare from their phones and/or computers—to allow more patients to receive care from the convenience and comfort of their homes. Now, as the pandemic wanes, there are significant debates over whether these changes should be made permanent. In this episode, the Goldwater Institute's Christina Sandefur and the Institute for Justice's Josh Windham explore the rationales behind telemedicine regulations and examine how reforms and lawsuits might transform how patients receive care.Featuring:- Josh Windham, Attorney, Institute for Justice- [Moderator] Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater InstituteVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Collectively the Department of Labor, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the National Labor Relations Board play a pivotal role in almost every dimension of employment in the nation. This inaugural panel discusses recent developments in the regulatory regimes of each and grades their performance over the four years of the Trump Administration. Greg Jacob moderates the discussion and presses our speakers about the fairness and accuracy of their grades.Featuring:- David Fortney, Co-Founder, Fortney & Scott LLC, and former Chief Legal Officer, U.S. Department of Labor- Leon Sequeira, Former Assistant Secretary of Labor for Policy, U.S. Department of Labor- Glenn Taubman, Staff Attorney, National Right To Work Legal Defense Foundation- [Moderator] Gregory Jacob, Partner, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, and former Counsel to Vice President Pence and Deputy Assistant to the PresidentVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Drones are rapidly becoming part of our everyday lives, and society will soon need to grapple with profound issues related to property, privacy, and nuisance. While drones are aircraft, the laws governing aircraft may soon be challenged as drones operate closer to the ground and in airspace never before occupied by manmade flying objects. The unique flying capability of drones is what makes them so valuable and is what will challenge settled laws, individual rights, and liberties.The editor and two of the co-authors of "Eyes to the Sky: Privacy and Commerce in the Age of the Drone" joined us for a panel discussion of these legal and policy issues and more.Featuring:- Matthew Feeney, Director, Project on Emerging Technologies, Cato Institute- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason University- Gregory S. Walden, Partner, Dentons- [Moderator] Gregory McNeal, Professor of Law and Public Policy, Pepperdine University and Co-Founder, AirMapVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.