Featuring Dorothy Robyn, Senior Policy Expert, Clinton and Obama Administrations; Stephen Van Beek, Vice President of Aviation Consulting, ICF International; and Chris Edwards, Editor, DownsizingGovernment.org, Cato Institute; moderated by Peter Russo, Director of Congressional Affairs, Cato Institute.
Of all the rights the U.S. Constitution protects, courts are probably most vigilant about protecting free speech. Freedom of expression is not only a cornerstone of democratic government, but also central to the more ordinary choices citizens make in their daily lives. Yet one class of speech has been almost entirely ignored by the courts: speech by professionals engaged in their business. In the new issue of Regulation, Cato scholar Timothy Sandefur argues that the Supreme Court should make it clear that censoring professionals is intolerable.
Published in the wake of the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Kelo v. New London, Cornerstone of Liberty: Property Rights in 21st Century America made a powerful contribution to the firestorm of interest in protecting property rights. Now in its second edition, Cornerstone of Liberty has been fully updated by authors Timothy and Christina Sandefur, and examines how dozens of new developments in courtrooms and legislatures across the country have shifted the landscape of private property rights since 2005.
The Cato Institute has released its 2014 Annual Report, which documents a dynamic year of growth and productivity. “Libertarianism is the philosophy of freedom,” Cato’s David Boaz writes in his book, The Libertarian Mind. “It is the indispensable framework for the future.” And as the new report demonstrates, the Cato Institute, thanks largely to the generosity of our Sponsors, is leading the charge to apply this framework across the policy spectrum.
FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, McCain v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Does the First Amendment Protect Political Speech?
Featuring James Bopp Jr., James Madison Center for Free Speech; Kathleen M. Sullivan, Stanford University Law School; Richard L. Hasen, Loyola Law School, Los Angeles; and Martin S. Lederman, Georgetown University Law Center.
On the morning of April 25 the Supreme Court will hear consolidated oral argument in two of the most important campaign finance cases in years. Pitting the Federal Election Commission, plus Sen. John McCain and other members of Congress, against numerous grassroots organizations, the question presented is whether those members, through the McCain-Feingold campaign finance act the Supreme Court upheld three years ago, can prevent such groups from running ads close to an election that take “a critical stance regarding a candidate’s position on an issue.” (Quoted from Senator McCain’s brief.) James Bopp will be arguing the case for the grassroots organizations, joined at the Court by Kathleen Sullivan. Professors Hasen and Lederman, who will also be at oral argument, have filed an amicus brief supporting the FEC and Senator McCain. Please join us for their assessments of the oral argument before the Roberts Court.