Featuring Alex Kozinski, Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; and J. Harvie Wilkinson III, Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit; moderated by Tim Lynch, Director, Project on Criminal Justice, Cato Institute.
American leaders have cooperated with regimes around the world that are, to varying degrees, repressive or corrupt. Such cooperation is said to serve the national interest. But these partnerships also contravene the nation’s commitments to democratic governance, civil liberties, and free markets. In Perilous Partners, authors Ted Galen Carpenter and Malou Innocent provide a strategy for resolving the ethical dilemmas between interests and values faced by Washington.
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.
A Skeptical Look at Grassroots Lobbying Disclosure
Featuring: Marvin Johnson, Legislative Counsel, American Civil Liberties Union; Mark Fitzgibbons, President, Corporate and Legal Affairs, AmericanTarget Advertising, Inc.; Stephen Hoersting, Executive Director, Center for Competitive Politics; and John Samples, Director, Center for Representative Government Cato Institute.
The House of Representatives will soon consider proposed ethics regulation that requires disclosure of the people and funding involved in grassroots lobbying efforts. “Reform” organizations are pushing such mandatory disclosure by claiming that “this lobbying disclosure reform would not in any way restrict” political speech. That is not so. For over 60 years, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized that stripping citizens of their rights to speak anonymously to each other about issues chills their rights of speech and association, and the Court has upheld such compelled disclosure only in narrow circumstances. Please join us for a discussion of the downside of this new effort to regulate political speech.