Back from lunch. Those who are in the exhibit hall if you could begin to move back, we would greatly appreciate it. I want to get a special thanks to Northrop Grumman. Jennifer walsh smith and Chris Valentino i know are here. If you could raise your hands. Jennifer is here and is valentino from Northrop Grumman, i want to give a special thanks to them for this lunch sponsorship. [applause] i also want to thank them for their seven years of sponsorship and support, which is been greatly, really a key reason for us to be able to host this forum are free for the government, military, and to be able to do this now for the tenth year. So thank you very much. I want to just also give to your attention, please, on your seats are flyers that describe the next years event, september 8 and 9th at the Marriott Wardman park. That would be september 8 and 9th, 2020. We also have for Corporate Executives that are interested, we have a series of quarterly Leadership Council meetings. We are in the th
On theprivacydebate. Please feel free to live tweet on that. Its been at the center of the that debate as Congress Moves forward and as we as a government, a as people, deal with the policy issues of privacy. The commission has been very much in the spotlight with major cases, the Facebook Cambridge analytica settlement, youtube settlement, and a series of hearings on competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st century. Were focused to have with us today two commissioners, Rebecca Kelly slaughter and Christine Wilson, both of whom have long backgrounds in public policy. Becka slaughter on the hill, Christine Wilson previously as chief of staff at the commission and both experienced in private law practice and in other capacities. Want to just jump right into it, and just kind of begin if we could with an overview. You now, i think, becka, you started in may of last year, christine in september, both of you are about a year on. Youve had the experience of the cases, the hearings. Ho
Next, members of the federal trade Commission Rebecca Slaughter and Christine Wilson on the agencies priorities and privacy concerns with new technologies. This event was hosted by the brookings institution. Welcome everybody here. Welcome to our cspan audience. Im cameron kerry, the distinguished visiting fellow at brookings and the center for technology and innovation. And i am pleased to continue our discussions on hashtag the privacy debate. Please feel free to live tweet on that. The federal trade commission a been very much at the center of that debate both as Congress Moves forward and as as a government, as a people deal with the policy issues of privacy. The commission has been very much in the spotlight with major cases, the Facebook Cambridge analytica settlement, youtube settlement, and a series of hearings on competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st century ear a lot of the focus on issue of data and privacy. So were fortunate to have with us today two commissioners
The subpoena last april. We will show you the oral argument from july. It is a little more than an hour. , may it please the court indulge me for a moment. Are counsels. Questions. To get i wanted to start out by saying i dont get to say this very is one of and this those instances when the District Courts opinion is extremely strong, especially when combined with the Supreme Court, and it answers a lot of the arguments. The District Courts statement that there is deference to congress here is wrong. Those come from cases where the president is not a party. Here we have a dispute between two equal coordinates. Keep anyould we different . Why wouldnt we look objectively as a court to determine if congress is pursuing a legitimate i dont think it would change the standard and it does not change because of the behavior. Cases thathe articulate the deferential tondard our cases which go two branches of government. Why. T dont understand dont understand why we would adopt the standard peer
I did just want to start out by saying, i dont get to say this very often, and this is one of those instances where the District Courts opinion is extreme a strong, especially when combined with the Supreme Courts position, where they recognize answers a lot of the arguments they have made. [inaudible] hold that thought then. The District Courts statement we dont sell efforts to congress is wrong because those come from cases where the president is not a party. Here, we have a dispute between two equal branches. We why wouldnt we look objectively, as a court, to determine whether congress is, in fact, pursuing legitimate legislative objective . Because your honor, i dont think you would change your standard this up in court has set in a number of cases does not change just because the subpoena is directed all of thecases, cases that articulate the that formed cases branches of government. Understand why wed adopt that. Why we wouldstand adopt the standard. That jumped out at me as i re