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.
Featuring Rose Gottemoeller, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; Rensselaer Lee, Foreign Policy Research Institute; and Charles Peña, Cato Institute
In February, President Bush and Russian president Vladimir Putin announced that the two countries would take measures to counter the threat of nuclear terrorism, including securing Russia’s nuclear facilities. Is it possible to secure nuclear weapons and materials to the so-called Fort Knox standard? If so, how and at what cost? What potential loopholes and vulnerabilities might still exist? What is the likelihood that we would be closing the barn door after some of the animals have already escaped? How does securing the potential supply of weapons affect the demand for them? Our experts will discuss progress made under the Nunn-Lugar cooperative threat reduction program and how the threat of nuclear terrorism might be prevented.