Tiwari v. Friedlander: Which Rational Basis Test is it Anyway? episode artwork

EPISODE · Nov 7, 2022 · 1H

Tiwari v. Friedlander: Which Rational Basis Test is it Anyway?

from FedSoc Forums · host The Federalist Society

In Tiwari v. Friedlander, the Petitioners ask the Supreme Court to grant certiorari to address whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires meaningful review of restrictions on the right to engage in a common occupation. The petition argues that the right to engage in a common occupation is deeply rooted in the nation’s history and tradition, but its protection has been inconsistent, sometimes leading to conflicting results across the lower courts. The petition also contends this inconsistency is caused by the standard under which courts review economic-liberty challenges— the rational basis test.The Petitioners, Dipendra Tiwari and Kishor Sapkota, challenge Kentucky’s Certificate-of-Need (CON) Law as an unconstitutional infringement on their right to earn an honest living. The CON law prevents them from opening a healthcare agency they designed to provide home services to the large community of Nepali-speaking refugees and immigrants in Louisville. By contrast, Kentucky contends that the CON law is necessary for lowering competitive pressure and increasing profits for incumbents who can pass their gains to the public.The petition raises questions about the proper articulation of the rational basis test and whether the right to engage in a common occupation is deeply rooted in history and tradition under the Court’s recent landmark decision Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Which Rational Basis Test is it anyway? Is the Right to Engage in a Common Occupation Deeply Rooted in History and Tradition and does the Fourteenth Amendment Guarantee Meaningful Protection for that Right? To discuss the petition and these questions, please join the lead attorney for the Petitioners, Andrew H. Ward, attorney at the Institute for Justice, and Professor David Upham, Director of Legal Studies and Associate Professor at the University of Dallas.Featuring: --Andrew Ward, Attorney, Institute for Justice--Prof. David Upham, Director of Legal Studies & Associate Professor, University of Dallas--Moderator: Adam Griffin, Law Clerk, US District Courts

In Tiwari v. Friedlander, the Petitioners ask the Supreme Court to grant certiorari to address whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires meaningful review of restrictions on the right to engage in a common occupation. The petition argues that the right to engage in a common occupation is deeply rooted in the nation’s history and tradition, but its protection has been inconsistent, sometimes leading to conflicting results across the lower courts. The petition also contends this inconsistency is caused by the standard under which courts review economic-liberty challenges— the rational basis test.The Petitioners, Dipendra Tiwari and Kishor Sapkota, challenge Kentucky’s Certificate-of-Need (CON) Law as an unconstitutional infringement on their right to earn an honest living. The CON law prevents them from opening a healthcare agency they designed to provide home services to the large community of Nepali-speaking refugees and immigrants in Louisville. By contrast, Kentucky contends that the CON law is necessary for lowering competitive pressure and increasing profits for incumbents who can pass their gains to the public.The petition raises questions about the proper articulation of the rational basis test and whether the right to engage in a common occupation is deeply rooted in history and tradition under the Court’s recent landmark decision Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Which Rational Basis Test is it anyway? Is the Right to Engage in a Common Occupation Deeply Rooted in History and Tradition and does the Fourteenth Amendment Guarantee Meaningful Protection for that Right? To discuss the petition and these questions, please join the lead attorney for the Petitioners, Andrew H. Ward, attorney at the Institute for Justice, and Professor David Upham, Director of Legal Studies and Associate Professor at the University of Dallas.Featuring: --Andrew Ward, Attorney, Institute for Justice--Prof. David Upham, Director of Legal Studies & Associate Professor, University of Dallas--Moderator: Adam Griffin, Law Clerk, US District Courts

NOW PLAYING

Tiwari v. Friedlander: Which Rational Basis Test is it Anyway?

0:00 1:00:40

No transcript for this episode yet

We transcribe on demand. Request one and we'll notify you when it's ready — usually under 10 minutes.

REFRA REFRA www.refra.frCommunauté Francophone des Utilisateurs de RenoiseNous vous proposons : Le guide de démarrage rapide, traduit en français, et agrémenté de vidéos Le manuel de référence, traduit en français, 99% fidèle à l'original Des forums d'entraide, avec des trucs & astuces, et des tutoriels divers... (Formants filters, Wobble, Vocoder...) Une webradio diffusant des musiques faites avec Renoise Addressing Alaskans - Alaska Public Media Alaska Public Media Addressing Alaskans features local lectures, debates and forums recorded at live events taking place in and around Anchorage, Alaska. A variety of local organizations host speakers with topics that matter to the community. Sasquatch Chronicles Sasquatch Chronicles - Bigfoot Encounters People are seeing something in the woods and there are too many reports for this to be ignored. Join us every Sunday night as we discuss recent Sasquatch sightings, encounters and talk to Bigfoot eye witnesses. Listen as we speak with researchers, witnesses and investigators to unravel the mystery of Bigfoot. Every week we will also bring you the latest Bigfoot news and information.Additional episodes and exclusive content can be found on our website www.sasquatchchronicles.com. Become a Member today and receive access to additional exclusive shows posted weekly, our full back catalog of episodes, the ability to comment on Episodes and Blog entries, and access to our Forums. For the latest news, please visit our Blog. We can also be found on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, and YouTube. BC Global Podcast Francis Limbe This Podcast is dedicated to the BC Global community and its listeners.BC Global is a nonprofit organization. its purpose is to serve as a platform to promote culture, education, economic, as well as peace and conflict resolution. We are a holistic community of thoughtful young leaders, entrepreneurs, human rights activists, who proactively share our skills, education knowledge interconnecting through our ecosystem of color, class, age, gender, religion, and beyond. To elevate ideas to solve socio-economic problems that cannot be solved or sustained without the diversity of thoughts, experiences, and expertise.We offer diverse music, discussion forums, peace-building, civic education, health, women, and children programs. All who desire to be a part of this work are welcome, regardless of religious preference or background. Founded: Oct. 8th, 2019Director : Francis LimbePhone # (909) 618-8336Email: [email protected]

Frequently Asked Questions

How long is this episode of FedSoc Forums?

This episode is 1 hour and 0 minutes long.

When was this FedSoc Forums episode published?

This episode was published on November 7, 2022.

What is this episode about?

In Tiwari v. Friedlander, the Petitioners ask the Supreme Court to grant certiorari to address whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires meaningful review of restrictions on the right to engage in a common occupation. The petition argues that the...

Can I download this FedSoc Forums episode?

Yes, you can download this episode by clicking the download button on the episode player, or subscribe to the podcast in your preferred podcast app for automatic downloads.
URL copied to clipboard!