Last month the Trump Administration announced that it will end the Affordable Care Act's government cost-sharing payments to insurers.  These payments are worth billions of dollars per year.  During the Obama Administration, a federal district court determined, in a lawsuit brought by the House of Representatives, that these payments are unlawful because Congress has not appropriated the funds to pay for them.   That decision, however, was stayed pending appeal.  According to a recent White House statement, these payments must cease because "there is no appropriation for cost-sharing reduction payments to insurance companies under Obamacare."  As a policy matter, the results of the Trump Administration's decision may be far-reaching.  An important legal question, however, is whether the Trump Administration is correct that these payments are unlawful. 
 
In this Teleforum, Andrew McCarthy will argue that the Trump Administration is right about the law -- Congress has not appropriated the funds, and the Executive Branch cannot spend money Congress has appropriated.  On that view, the Obama Administration violated the law by making the payments and it is wrong to blame the Trump Administration for correcting course, no matter one's policy views.   Prof. Daniel Hemel, by contrast, will argue that the Trump Administration has overstated its case and that, in fact, there are serious arguments in favor of continuing the cost-sharing payments.   If so, the Trump Administration's decision itself may not withstand judicial review.   Please join us for this timely and important discussion.  
 
Featuring:
Prof. Daniel Hemel, Assistant Professor of Law, University of Chicago Law School
Andrew C. McCarthy, Senior Fellow, National Review Institute
Moderator: Prof. Aaron L. Nielson, Associate Professor Law, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University
Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up here. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

The ACA and Appropriations: Does the Administration Have the Authority?

The concept of national security has broadened considerably since the early decades of the National Security Council, which celebrates its 70th anniversary this year.  Economic and financial issues have been elevated to crucial elements of our nation&rsquo;s security, alongside the traditional diplomatic and military issues. In recognition of this development, the recent Russia&lrm;/Iran sanctions bill made the Secretary of the Treasury a member of the National Security Council. What perspectives will the Treasury Secretary bring to interagency deliberations at the White House? What is Treasury's broader interagency role, not just in Washington but also in U.S. embassies and military commands abroad?
Featuring:
Ambassador Robert M. Kimmitt, Senior International Counsel, WilmerHale 
 
Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up here. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

The Role of Treasury in National Security Policy

Should software be regulated like a military weapon? That&rsquo;s the direction in which most Western nations seem to be moving, under the guidance of the international Wassenaar Arrangement governing international export controls.  During its 2013 plenary session, the Wassenaar member nations agreed to implement export controls for (1) software, hardware, and technology that generate, operate, deliver or communicate with &ldquo;intrusion software&rdquo;; and (2) &ldquo;carrier class&rdquo; IP network communications surveillance items. The purpose of these controls was to protect activists and opposition figures from monitoring by authoritarian governments and to keep software and technology out of the hands of malicious hackers.
But the agreed-to controls control not only malicious &ldquo;intrusion&rdquo; software items, but virtually any type of software, hardware, and technology designed to counter &ldquo;intrusion&rdquo; software. The controls have also been ineffective in actually reaching their intended targets&mdash;barring specific companies from exporting specific tools to specific end-users for specific purposes&mdash;and international implementation has been widely divergent. 
Featuring:

Alan Cohn, Counsel, Steptoe &amp; Johnson LLP
Stewart Baker, Partner, Steptoe &amp; Johnson LLP

Moderator: 

Matthew Heiman, Vice President, Corporate Secretary &amp; Associate General Counsel, Johnson Controls

Sign up for Regulatory Transparency Project updates at RegProject.org.

Discussion on the Wassenaar Arrangement

The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives & libertarians dedicated to reforming the current legal order.