Skip to comments.Rule Change Would Ban Judges' Federalist Society Membership
Posted on 01/24/2020 5:14:58 AM PST by cotton1706
As Democrats efforts to oust President Trump from office have played out in the Senate this week, his opponents in the judiciary branch of government quietly maneuvered to curb conservatives growing influence on the federal bench.
The ethical advisory arm of the federal judiciary is quietly circulating a draft rule that would ban judges and their clerks from belonging to the Federalist Society, an organization aimed at fostering an originalist interpretation of the Constitution at law schools and through forums and debates across the country.
The proposed rules change is the latest salvo in a campaign to cast the Federalist Society as too political, and thereby politically risky, for judiciary participation. The Wall Street Journal editorial board labeled the proposal judicial political mischief masked in high sounding rhetoric, a step that is spurring a backlash among judges and others who should denounce it as undermining legal education in America and perhaps violating the First Amendment right of association.
Conservative activists put it more bluntly, calling the rules change a transparent attempt to neuter the Federalist Society. The motivation is obvious, these activists say, after the Senate has confirmed a record number of Trump-appointed judges, many of whom are Federalist Society members or have participated in the groups events.
This rules change was probably instigated and driven by people who are upset with the transformation that is taking place in the federal judiciary, and since they are on the left, they are accustomed to addressing problems by trying to censor the other side, a longtime Federalist Society member told RealClearPolitics. And thats exactly what this is an act of censorship.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
But being a former ACLU lawyer (RBG) is just fine!
Totalitarians are SO predictable.
I didnt realize the judiciary branch had its own cadre of bureaucrats.
I disagree it is censorship; it is an infringement of freedom of association. An act the federal government is specifically forbidden from meddling with.
Judges and clerks MUST then also resign from the ABA, as it is primarily a radical liberal advocacy organization now. Most right thinking conservative attorneys have long ago quit supporting the ABA with their dues.
So what are the proposed changes? The artcle had a lot of outrage but few actual facts. It's not like the actual text or a link would hit a hard limit on publishing space like the size of page on a newspaper.
And I doubt that the American Communist Lawyers Union will be touched.
You beat me to it.
“Rule change” can’t trump Constitution and Bill of Rights.
ACLU defended Communist traitors from domestic wiretaps but is okay with spying on the Trump campaign
...also, religious beliefs would be banned, and communist Party membership mandated.
These simple rule changes would help to weed out some of the worst threats to the revolution.
You cannot lament that it leaked and claim that it is open for discussion. Some dichotomies are not false, and this is one. It's one or the other baby.
...would seem to be of some import here.
These leftists are disgusting and pathetic. CRUSH them! No quarter to these smarmy anti-Freedom losers. None.
How exactly would they enforce such a rule?
After we retake the House, I really hope to see The House Un-American Activities Committee resurrected.
sure sounds like a blatant and deliberate violation of First Amendment right to “freedom of association” to me, LAWSUIT!
Soon reading the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence will be a felony punishable by an indefinite stay at a small facility somewhere in the Southwest that no one returns from. Ever.
A:OK is out, A:OC is in
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.