app_store_button

google_play_button

DK - Details page - Device banner - 894x1036

Nyd den ubegrænsede adgang til tusindvis af spændende e- og lydbøger - helt gratis

Lyt når som helst, hvor som helst 

Cato Institute

Podcast of policy and book forums, Capitol Hill briefings and other events from the Cato Institute
 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Cato Event Podcast

What does life on the front lines of criminal justice actually look like—and what can it teach us about the state of American law today? Please join us for a discussion with Randy Barnett on his new memoir, Felony Review: Tales of True Crime and Corruption in Chicago, a gripping behind-the-scenes account of his years as a young prosecutor in the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office during the late 1970s and early 1980s.
 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Felony Review: Tales of True Crime and Corruption in Chicago

In the recently published No Compulsion in Religion—No Exceptions: Islamic Arguments for Religious Freedom, Cato senior fellow Mustafa Akyol collaborated with a team of international Muslim scholars to articulate a noncoercive vision of Islam. Among the issues addressed in the book are blasphemy laws that restrict free speech in dozens of countries—with Pakistan often regarded as home to some of the most troubling cases.

Akyol will discuss the issue with two Pakistani scholars: Husnul Amin, author of the book’s chapter on blasphemy, and Muhammad Khalid Masud, the book’s academic adviser and a distinguished scholar of Islamic law and theology. The three will also explore how a reformist reading of the Qur’an and other Islamic sources can help build a case against blasphemy laws.

 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Compulsion in Speech: Blasphemy Laws in Pakistan and Beyond

Many Americans think they understand today’s Supreme Court: six conservative justices appointed by Republicans, three liberals appointed by Democrats, and predictably partisan outcomes, especially in the “big” cases. But Sarah Isgur, host of the Advisory Opinions podcast, editor of SCOTUSblog, and one of the savviest Court-watchers in the country, is here to tell you that’s wrong.

In Last Branch Standing, Isgur argues that the conventional left-right framing fundamentally misconceives how the justices decide questions—not cases!—and that once you understand how they really think, the Court looks far more like a 3–3–3 institution than a 6–3 one. She also takes readers inside the building itself: the personalities, the quirks, the clerk culture, and the institutional dynamics that shape outcomes far more than partisan affiliation alone.

Isgur’s account of the Court’s role in our current constitutional moment is equally illuminating. With Congress having largely abdicated its lawmaking responsibilities, presidents of both parties have rushed to fill the resulting policy vacuum through executive action—often setting themselves on a collision course with SCOTUS. And while the shadow docket creates a misleading impression of unremitting executive branch success, the full picture of how the current administration actually fares before the Court may surprise you.

Join us for a conversation with Sarah Isgur about what may be the last constitutionally functioning branch of American government.

 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last Branch Standing: A Potentially Surprising, Occasionally Witty Journey Inside Today’s Supreme Court

Does the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee birthright citizenship to persons born in the United States to parents without permanent immigration status? Please join us for an insightful discussion with a group of scholars who will break down Trump v. Barbara, consider the recent Supreme Court oral argument, and explore the approaches the Court might take as it reaches a decision.
 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Trump v. Barbara: Birthright Citizenship at the Supreme Court

President Trump has repeatedly promised to withdraw US forces from Europe in an ongoing debate over America’s role in NATO. Earlier this month, the Pentagon announced that 5,000 troops will be withdrawn from bases in Germany over the next 6 to 12 months, out of roughly 36,000 US personnel based in the country. Although the justification was ostensibly Germany’s unwillingness to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a withdrawal is consonant with Trump’s prior statements and his effort to withdraw 12,000 troops from Germany in 2020. More than 75 years after the founding of NATO, is a US withdrawal from Germany warranted? What will be the likely consequences? And can the administration sustain a burden-shift to Europe? Please join our panel of distinguished experts on transatlantic security to discuss these questions.
 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Should the United States Withdraw Troops from Germany?

The Summer of Our Discontent confronts the breakdown of civility in American society. Civil discourse has given way to identitarianism, altering our media, education, policing, and the ambient language and culture we use to make sense of our lives. In his book, Thomas Chatterton Williams chronicles the transformation of social justice activism following the summer of 2020. He explores how a culture of racial identitarianism undermines individual agency and empowerment.

Join Williams for a discussion with Cato research fellow Erec Smith about the existential crisis facing American liberalism, and how we might move beyond the current impasse toward a more integrated and resilient public square.

 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Summer of Our Discontent: The Age of Certainty and the Demise of Discourse

The Trump administration has elevated the strategic importance of the Western Hemisphere to the United States at a time when countries in the region are turning away from leftist populism. Can dollarization play a key role in achieving stability and growth in Latin America? John Cochrane, David Malpass, and Emilio Ocampo will discuss the benefits of dollarization to Latin American countries with a history of bad monetary policy, why dollarization in the Americas would be good for the United States, and how adopting the dollar as the legal currency has worked out in Panama, Ecuador, and El Salvador. The speakers will discuss ways of dollarizing and why that reform is especially relevant to Argentina and Venezuela today.
 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Has the Time Come for Dollarization in the Americas?

A free, open, and civil society depends on the freedom of individuals and institutions to direct private resources toward the causes they value. Today, that freedom faces growing pressure as the federal government seeks to use nonprofit status as a lever of political control. 

Join us for a conversation with President and CEO of DonorsTrust Lawson Bader, Cato Senior Fellow Walter Olson, and President of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation John Palfrey on the importance of philanthropic freedom and what’s at stake when the state asserts authority over private giving.

 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Freedom to Give: Philanthropy, Civil Society, and the Limits of State Power

Secretary of Energy Chris Wright is charged with leading the Department of Energy through unprecedented changes. His mandate to unleash energy dominance—often through deregulation that expands the supply and types of energy available by allowing markets to function more freely—is solidifying the United States as the global leader in energy production. Secretary Wright draws inspiration from a rare mix of academic training, political acumen, and private sector entrepreneurship.

Still, deregulation faces significant domestic and international headwinds, and many stakeholders want the government to play an increased role in the energy sector. Join us for a special fireside chat to discuss the current state of energy policy and the energy revolutions to come.

 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

How America Can Unleash the Next Energy Revolution A Fireside Chat with Secretary Chris Wright

Social Security is widely portrayed as a self-financed program with a long-term trust fund solvency problem. But for more than a decade, the program has already been financed in part through federal borrowing. The trust fund is a political construct, not a true repository of savings or investments. Since 2010, the Treasury has borrowed more than $1.5 trillion to pay Social Security benefits, and borrowing is projected to rise sharply even before the trust fund is exhausted in 2032. Over the next 75 years, the program’s cash-flow shortfall will exceed $28 trillion in present-value terms.

This event will examine how trust fund accounting masks Social Security’s growing contribution to federal debt, why economic growth cannot solve the problem on its own, why lifting the payroll tax cap will not sustainably close the program’s funding gap, and how current benefit design fuels immediate deficits and long-term fiscal imbalance. Experts will discuss reform strategies that address the program’s structural flaws and prevent Social Security from worsening the debt crisis.

 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Social Security in the Red: Implications for Federal Debt

One of the “wedding vendor” cases has finally arrived at the Supreme Court. Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in suburban Denver, declined to make a wedding cake for a gay couple because of his religious objections to same-sex marriage. The Colorado Civil Rights Commission sued him under the state’s anti-discrimination law, eventually prevailing in state court. Phillips continues to assert his freedom of speech (more precisely, to be free from compelled speech) and freedom of religion, and the case raises other potential issues: Is there a difference between declining to serve a class of people versus a particular event? Does the level of customization of a product matter? Is artisanal baking even protected by the First Amendment? Shouldn’t all this boil down to the freedom of association — including the freedom not to associate — or maybe it’s no different than Jim Crow–era denials of service? Please join us for a spirited conversation between lawyers who filed briefs on opposite sides of Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission on the eve of Supreme Court oral argument.
 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The First Amendment vs. Anti-Discrimination Law: A Preview of Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission on the Eve of Oral Argument

Lyt når som helst, hvor som helst

Other podcasts you might like ...