INGRASSIA: The Supreme Court’s Attack On Free Speech Proves The Federalist Society Can No Longer Be Trusted As An Authority For Selecting Judges In A Second Trump Administration

The Gateway Pundit ^ | June 28, 2024 | Paul Ingrassia

[Dr. Franklin]

[O]ne of the issues that helped calm the nerves of ambivalent conservatives and get them to support President Trump, whom they perceived as an insurgent populist with questionable positions on social issues like abortion, was his commitment to selecting judges on a list provided by the Federalist Society. The Federalist Society has long been considered a trusted authority, .... For years it was customary to believe that any judge that had the FedSoc stamp of approval was worthy of an appointment to the federal judiciary. This was because FedSoc was supposed to stand for textualism and originalism, a faithful adherence to the Constitution’s intended meaning – its judges were widely perceived to be among the cream of the crop.

For years, the organization worked diligently behind the scenes to furnish the legal and jurisprudential handiwork to overturn Roe v. Wade. With President Trump’s election, and the nomination of three FedSoc-approved judges to the Supreme Court: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett – all that hard work became reality...

That is a lesson that has been clearly lost on The Federalist Society, many of whose members are still reticent about President Trump – even though he gave them more power (and victories — and, indirectly, money) than any president or politician in their entire forty-two-year history. Whether owing to complacency or cowardice, or sheer incompetence, the Federalist Society and the judges it has anointed have proven woefully inadequate to meet the challenges of our times. Instead of producing street fighters with the legal genius to sufficiently respond to a constitutional crisis of the magnitude our country is facing, and adapt their jurisprudential stances when necessary, they have instead yielded an unimpressive lot of squishy judges who cannot stand on principle whenever confronted with the slightest hint of controversy.

[Dr. Franklin]

It's time for MAGA to insist on Anti-Federalist conservative judges who understand that the central role of our Bill of Rights is to limit the power of the Federal government to infringe on the rights of the individual, free speech, etc. Goody two-shoes Amy Conehead and frat boy Kavanaugh consistently disappoint us with their elitist weaseling.

[Mr. N. Wolfe]

Well said.

[Organic Panic]

Yep. One of Trump’s greatest flaws was trusting those jerks.

[OakOak]

Amy Coney-Barrett wants complete Government Domination.

[Dilbert San Diego]

Anx yet Trump’s picks have delivered conservative victories in some cases, so there’s that.

[Carry_Okie]

What this really means is that law schools are so successful at screening for and further brainwashing future judges that the pickings for superior "conservative judges" are very lean.

This is what we get for tolerating university "education." The key to fixing it is to dispense with the leftist accrediation monopoly.

[Carry_Okie]

accrediation => accreditation

My apologies to the forum.

[icclearly]

Yep. One of Trump’s greatest flaws was trusting those jerks.

Trump has plenty of flaws, but you are 100% correct. His talent picking leaves much to be desired.

Very much!

Don't expect it to change.

[9YearLurker]

The FS IMO has long been an obvious uniparty control.

[Dr. Franklin]

What this really means is that law schools are so successful at screening for and further brainwashing future judges that the pickings for superior "conservative judges" are very lean.
This is what we get for tolerating university "education." The key to fixing it is to dispense with the leftist accreditation monopoly.

American law schools are controlled by the American Bar Association. Those few which are not in it, are seeking its accreditation. Largely, the ABA law school teach sophistry and advocacy, and not the history of the common law, etc. The idea is that if a judge writes an long enough opinion, he/she can justify any BS.

It's time to adopt something closer to the British model of people entering the legal profesion with only a bachelors degree as solicitors or paralegals and then progressing onward to represent clients in court after getting an advanced degree in law or serving an apprenticeship to sit for the bar exam. Professors in law schools should actually hold advanced degrees requiring a written dissertation to be qualified as an expert in an area of law. The ABA model requirement is only a first degree in law from one of its schools, which it calls a doctorate but academically is not. In short, most ABA professors teach law because they got high marks in their first law degree, not because they have a second LL. M., S.J.D. or Ph.D. degree.

[SuperLuminal]

The Federalist Society has been in the dumper for many years...

[bobbo666]

Do not forget that DJT is from the free market — where folks are held accountable for their actions and such speak louder than words. His choices have embedded in them the power to fire people.
The DeepState does not allow — he did not understand that at his core.
He does now.

[bigbob]

Trump appointed three textualists, like Scalia, who “focus on the plain meaning of the text of a legal document. Textualism usually emphasizes how the terms in the Constitution would be understood by people at the time they were ratified, as well as the context in which those terms appear.1 Textualists usually believe there is an objective meaning of the text, and they do not typically inquire into questions regarding the intent of the drafters, adopters, or ratifiers of the Constitution and its amendments when deriving meaning from the text.”

Or you can have justices who feel the Constitution is a fluid document that should be interpreted in the context of modern events, adding their idea of what the framers might have said if they wrote it today.

Pick one. But don’t be surprised when all textualists don’t agree 100% of the time.

This author is full of crap.

[icclearly]

he did not understand that at his core. He does now.

You say he understands.....BUT you don't know that and we will not find out until he takes office.

My bet is he is the same old Trump and will do just as bad filling jobs as he always has.