![SCOTUS Short: Chatrie v. United States [Opinion] @TheFederalistSociety](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/YVuR6sP-OXY/maxresdefault.jpg)
Uploaded July 2026 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
How much privacy do you have in your location data?
In Chatrie v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the government's acquisition of Google's geofence location data is a search under the Fourth Amendment.
Watch this SCOTUS Short for a quick breakdown of the case and its implications for digital privacy.
How much privacy do you have in your location data?
In Chatrie v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the government's acquisition of Google's geofence location data is a search under the Fourth Amendment.
Watch this SCOTUS Short for a quick breakdown of the case and its implications for digital privacy.
![SCOTUS Short: Chatrie v. United States [Opinion]](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/YVuR6sP-OXY/mqdefault.jpg "SCOTUS Short: Chatrie v. United States [Opinion]
How much privacy do you have in your location data?
In Chatrie v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the governments acquisition of Googles geofence location data is a search under the Fourth Amendment.
Watch this SCOTUS Short for a quick breakdown of the case and its implications for digital privacy.")
![[LIVE] The CLARITY Act and Fed Master Accounts: Defining Cryptos Place in the U.S. Financial System](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Yn7-W_CNjv8/mqdefault.jpg "[LIVE] The CLARITY Act and Fed Master Accounts: Defining Cryptos Place in the U.S. Financial System
Join us for a timely discussion on two developments shaping the future of digital assets in the United States. We will examine the CLARITY Act and its effort to establish clear rules for whether digital assets fall under SEC or CFTC oversight, as well as the ongoing dispute over Federal Reserve master accounts for crypto-focused banking institutions.
Together, these issues highlight a central question: will digital asset firms gain both regulatory clarity and meaningful access to the nation’s financial infrastructure? The webinar will explore how the interaction between market-structure legislation and banking access could influence stablecoins, institutional adoption, and the broader integration of crypto into traditional finance.
Opening Remarks:
• Hon. Cynthia Lummis, U.S. Senate, Wyoming
Featuring:
• Paige Paridon, Executive Vice President and Co-Head of Regulatory Affairs, Bank Policy Institute
• Alex Pollock, Senior Fellow, Mises Institute
• Corey Then, Deputy General Counsel of Regulatory Strategy and Global Policy, Circle
• Prof. David Zaring, Elizabeth F. Putzel Professor and Professor of Legal Studies & Business Ethics, The Wharton School, The University of Pennsylvania
• (Moderator) J.C. Boggs, Partner, King & Spalding
Register for the live webinar at https://fedsoc.org/events/the-clarity-act-and-fed-master-accounts-defining-crypto-s-place-in-the-u-s-financial-system
* * * * *
As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.")
![[LIVE] Justice Alito’s Impact on Criminal Law & Procedure](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/YtiTCUI594M/mqdefault.jpg "[LIVE] Justice Alito’s Impact on Criminal Law & Procedure
Justice Alito has played a significant role in shaping contemporary criminal law and procedure, particularly in cases involving the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments. This panel will explore his influence on doctrines governing search and seizure, sentencing, the rights of criminal defendants, and the administration of the criminal justice system. Panelists will analyze key opinions and dissents to assess Justice Alito’s emphasis on text, history, and practical consequences, as well as his views on the balance between individual rights, public safety, and institutional competence.
Featuring:
• Hon. Sarah K. Campbell, Justice, Supreme Court of Tennessee
• Hon. Benjamin Cassady, Commissioner, Sacramento County
• Hon. Amul Thapar, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
• Moderator: Hon. Andrew Oldham, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
* * * * *
As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.")
![This or That - National Symposium Edition [Ep.2]](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/_fe6FnLo8cQ/mqdefault.jpg "This or That - National Symposium Edition [Ep.2]
This or that? Student Symposium edition! 🤔
Share your answers with us in the comments!")
![[LIVE] Litigation Finance: Access to Justice, Lawfare, and Foreign Influence](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ao2jelmHHJQ/mqdefault.jpg "[LIVE] Litigation Finance: Access to Justice, Lawfare, and Foreign Influence
Third-party litigation funding has grown into a major part of modern civil litigation. Supporters argue it expands access to justice and helps under-resourced plaintiffs challenge powerful defendants. Critics argue it can distort litigation incentives, empower foreign or opaque funders, and undermine attorney-client control of litigation. As state legislatures and Congress consider restrictions and disclosure requirements, how should policymakers balance transparency, donor privacy, access to courts, national security, and attorney ethics? Is third-party litigation funding a threat to the integrity of the civil justice system that conservatives should rein in, or a market mechanism that conservatives should protect as a counterweight to institutional lawfare? Can the foreign-adversary money problem be severed from the broader regulatory question?
Join us for a discussion of these and other issues surrounding the financing of litigation.
Featuring:
• Oramel H. Skinner, III, Executive Director, Alliance For Consumers
• Gene P. Hamilton, President, America First Legal Foundation
• Phil Goldberg, Partner, Shook, Hardy & Bacon, LLP
• [Moderator] Jim Wedeking, Counsel, Boyden Gray PLLC
Register for the live webinar at https://fedsoc.org/events/litigation-finance-access-to-justice-lawfare-and-foreign-influence
* * * * *
As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.")
