The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: Formerly Once-Ler on November 16, 2018, 06:11:21 am
-
https://www.axios.com/federalist-society-lawyers-trump-rule-of-law-7f347312-e4cd-4deb-957d-dcbd60216d19.html (https://www.axios.com/federalist-society-lawyers-trump-rule-of-law-7f347312-e4cd-4deb-957d-dcbd60216d19.html)
A team of lawyers from the conservative Federalist Society, organized by Kellyanne Conway's husband George Conway, have formed a group dedicated to highlighting the Trump administration's perceived flouting of constitutional and legal norms, reports the New York Times.
Details: The formation of the group, called Checks and Balances, came ahead of the start of the Federalist Society's annual convention. The Federalist Society has taken on a leading role in the Trump administration's move to reshape the nation's federal courts. In a statement, the 14 lawyers who formed Checks and Balances say that they "believe in the rule of law, the power of the truth, the independence of the criminal justice system, the imperative of individual rights, and the necessity of civil discourse. ... We seek to provide a voice and a network for like-minded attorneys to discuss these ideas."
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5096610-Checks-and-Balances.html (https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5096610-Checks-and-Balances.html)
CHECKS AND BALANCES
Mission Statement
We are a group of attorneys who would traditionally be considered conservative or libertarian. We believe in the rule of law, the power of truth, the independence of the criminal justice system, the imperative of individual rights, and the necessity of civil discourse. We believe these principles apply regardless of the party or persons in power. We believe in “a government of laws, not of men.â€
We believe in the Constitution. We believe in free speech, a free press, separation of powers, and limited government. We have faith in the resiliency of the American experiment. We seek to provide a voice and a network for like-minded attorneys to discuss these ideas, and we hope that they will join with us to stand up for these principles.
Jonathan H. Adler
Orin S. Kerr
John B. Bellinger, III
Marisa C. Maleck
Phillip D. Brady
Lori S. Meyer
George T. Conway III
Paul J. McNulty
Carrie F. Cordero
Alan Charles Raul
Stuart M. Gerson
Tom Ridge
Peter D. Keisler
Paul Rosenzweig
Each of us speaks and acts solely in our individual capacities, and our views should not be attributed to any organization we may be affiliated with.
November 13, 2018
-
Federalists? Conservative?
Thought Federalists went out with John Adams and Alexander Hamilton.
Seems everyone wants to be labeled Conservative.
:)
-
If Hedley Lamarr were alive today he could not have assembled a finer group of rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers and Communistss
-
If Hedley Lamarr were alive today he could not have assembled a finer group of rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers and Communistss
What, no Methodists?
-
What, no Methodists?
The Irish took them 1st.
-
https://www.axios.com/federalist-society-lawyers-trump-rule-of-law-7f347312-e4cd-4deb-957d-dcbd60216d19.html (https://www.axios.com/federalist-society-lawyers-trump-rule-of-law-7f347312-e4cd-4deb-957d-dcbd60216d19.html)
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5096610-Checks-and-Balances.html (https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5096610-Checks-and-Balances.html)
CHECKS AND BALANCES
Mission Statement
We are a group of attorneys who would traditionally be considered conservative or libertarian. We believe in the rule of law, the power of truth, the independence of the criminal justice system, the imperative of individual rights, and the necessity of civil discourse. We believe these principles apply regardless of the party or persons in power. We believe in “a government of laws, not of men.â€
We believe in the Constitution. We believe in free speech, a free press, separation of powers, and limited government. We have faith in the resiliency of the American experiment. We seek to provide a voice and a network for like-minded attorneys to discuss these ideas, and we hope that they will join with us to stand up for these principles.
Jonathan H. Adler
Orin S. Kerr
John B. Bellinger, III
Marisa C. Maleck
Phillip D. Brady
Lori S. Meyer
George T. Conway III
Paul J. McNulty
Carrie F. Cordero
Alan Charles Raul
Stuart M. Gerson
Tom Ridge
Peter D. Keisler
Paul Rosenzweig
Each of us speaks and acts solely in our individual capacities, and our views should not be attributed to any organization we may be affiliated with.
November 13, 2018
So, pretty much the entire Country Club.
-
So, pretty much the entire Country Club.
So what is the specific objection to policies during Trump's first two years?
--Disapprove of either SC a appointee?
--Disapprove of regulatory cutbacks?
Surely a long list of self-important lawyers, should not be at a loss over specfics.
But alas, none are offered.
I would think more of them, if they criticized Speaker Ryan, nd his non-action on items promised by BOTH President Trump, and a majority of Republican House members/candidates.
-
So what is the specific objection to policies during Trump's first two years?
--Disapprove of either SC a appointee?
--Disapprove of regulatory cutbacks?
Surely a long list of self-important lawyers, should not be at a loss over specfics.
But alas, none are offered.
I would think more of them, if they criticized Speaker Ryan, nd his non-action on items promised by BOTH President Trump, and a majority of Republican House members/candidates.
Nope!! These so-called conservatives just don't like Trump. That's the bottom line. He has done nothing policy-wise to warrant any criticism at all.
-
So, pretty much the entire Country Club.
Yep, and the independence of the judiciary is proved to be a myth almost every ruling.
-
So what is the specific objection to policies during Trump's first two years?
--Disapprove of either SC a appointee?
--Disapprove of regulatory cutbacks?
Surely a long list of self-important lawyers, should not be at a loss over specfics.
But alas, none are offered.
I would think more of them, if they criticized Speaker Ryan, nd his non-action on items promised by BOTH President Trump, and a majority of Republican House members/candidates.
It's all about the Tweets, and signing ginormous spending bills. While the President's record is better than most of us expected, it's not perfect.
-
It's all about the Tweets, and signing ginormous spending bills. While the President's record is better than most of us expected, it's not perfect.
So, should we blame Trump or the 95% of DC’s political establishment, i.e. those who put up roadblocks to Trump’s achieving his conservative agenda?
I blame establishment shills like McCain and Flake and Ryan etc.
-
It's all about the Tweets, and signing ginormous spending bills. While the President's record is better than most of us expected, it's not perfect.
Well one would rightly expect a big list of important lawyers, to make their on list.
Just thinking out loud: What are the major accomplishments of Paul, Ryan and Jeff Flake?
Or of Sen. Ben Sasse, R-N PhD, Harvard and Yale?
Or how about Gov. Jeb Bush? Sen Marco Rubio?
-
Well one would rightly expect a big list of important lawyers, to make their on list.
Just thinking out loud: What are the major accomplishments of Paul, Ryan and Jeff Flake?
Or of Sen. Ben Sasse, R-N PhD, Harvard and Yale?
Or how about Gov. Jeb Bush? Sen Marco Rubio?
Personally, I think this gripe from the Federalist Society is silly. Did he, or did he not, go by their list for SCOTUS nominations? That's more attention than they have ever gotten from a President.
-
Federalists? Conservative?
Thought Federalists went out with John Adams and Alexander Hamilton.
Seems everyone wants to be labeled Conservative.
:)
------------------------------------
The Federalists, especially Hamilton, were never Principled Conservatives.
-
Personally, I think this gripe from the Federalist Society is silly. Did he, or did he not, go by their list for SCOTUS nominations? That's more attention than they have ever gotten from a President.
Major clarification here -- this is not a gripe from "The Federalist Society", most of whom (I am one) are pretty thrilled with Trump. This is a self-appointed group of 14 lawyers/law professors who happen to be members of the Federalist Society, using the organization's name to try to get more attention than a lousy 14 lawyers/law professors would generally warrant. That is out of a total membership of more than 60,000 lawyers. I happen to know one of those guys on that list rather well. He is a conservative, but he's also a douchy snob.
If you want to know what the membership of the Federalist Society itself thinks in general, just look at Leonard Leo, the guy the membership as a whole elected as Executive VP, who has been right with Trump the entire time.
For those of you who aren't really familiar with it, the Federalist Society likely saved American jurisprudence and Constitutionalism. Before it was started in 1982, originalism was a dying judicial philosophy.
-
Major clarification here -- this is not a gripe from "The Federalist Society", most of whom (I am one) are pretty thrilled with Trump. This is a self-appointed group of 14 lawyers/law professors who happen to be members of the Federalist Society, using the organization's name to try to get more attention than a lousy 14 lawyers/law professors would generally warrant. That is out of a total membership of more than 60,000 lawyers. I happen to know one of those guys on that list rather well. He is a conservative, but he's also a douchy snob.
If you want to know what the membership of the Federalist Society itself thinks in general, just look at Leonard Leo, the guy the membership as a whole elected as Executive VP, who has been right with Trump the entire time.
:thumbsup:
-
So, should we blame Trump or the 95% of DC’s political establishment, i.e. those who put up roadblocks to Trump’s achieving his conservative agenda?
I blame establishment shills like McCain and Flake and Ryan etc.
So are you going to give them credit for the successes? You can't credit Trump for everything good and blame someone else for the bad things. That's just dishonest.
-
Well one would rightly expect a big list of important lawyers, to make their on list.
Just thinking out loud: What are the major accomplishments of Paul, Ryan and Jeff Flake?
Or of Sen. Ben Sasse, R-N PhD, Harvard and Yale?
Or how about Gov. Jeb Bush? Sen Marco Rubio?
No more or less than what Trump had done with Daddy's money before the Presidency.
-
It's all about the Tweets, and signing ginormous spending bills. While the President's record is better than most of us expected, it's not perfect.
Reagan wasn't perfect neither.
-
Reagan wasn't perfect neither.
Especially after the '86 midterms. 9999hair out0000
Handing Bush the VP after 1984 was probably his biggest mistake, though. He should have dumped Bush I, and Bush II should have replaced Cheney. I liked Cheney and all, but Bush needed to be grooming his replacement. Reagan should have known Bush I would start undoing his legacy from 1/21/89 on. He may have needed Bush to beat Carter in '80, but that was no longer the case in '84.
-
Major clarification here -- this is not a gripe from "The Federalist Society", most of whom (I am one) are pretty thrilled with Trump. This is a self-appointed group of 14 lawyers/law professors who happen to be members of the Federalist Society, using the organization's name to try to get more attention than a lousy 14 lawyers/law professors would generally warrant. That is out of a total membership of more than 60,000 lawyers. I happen to know one of those guys on that list rather well. He is a conservative, but he's also a douchy snob.
If you want to know what the membership of the Federalist Society itself thinks in general, just look at Leonard Leo, the guy the membership as a whole elected as Executive VP, who has been right with Trump the entire time.
For those of you who aren't really familiar with it, the Federalist Society likely saved American jurisprudence and Constitutionalism. Before it was started in 1982, originalism was a dying judicial philosophy.
Thanks for a post from an informed source. Cannot the Federalist Society somehow prevent this pretentious small minority from using their name in stuff like this. Or was it the Free Press who chose to show this as coming from the Federalist Society?
-
Thanks for a post from an informed source. Cannot the Federalist Society somehow prevent this pretentious small minority from using their name in stuff like this.
No. They didn't claim to be speaking for the organization -- just for themselves as individuals who happen to be members. And the statements they've made apart from this written statement also have been very careful to distinguish their own beliefs from that of the organization.
Zero chance they'll be kicked out. One thing that makes the Federalist Society different from almost every similar group is that different views are not silenced. Back when it started, conservatives/originalists were hard to find within the legal profession and law schools, and didn't speak out all that much. As a consequence, the organization has deliberately invited those with dissenting views to participate in conferences, panels, etc.. It's actually very clever, because it essentially broadened the audience and gave it a reputation for fairness. You'd get some big-name people who were judicial activists/Democrats to attend and speak, and they'd usually be very complimentary of how they were treated, etc.. That let you attract more people, and it snowballed.
Basically, the Federalist Society believes that it's ideas are the right ones, and will win in fair debate. So, that's what it pushes.
Now, that's not to say there won't be some blunt disagreements with these guys. There absolutely will be. But they won't be silenced or given the boot just because they don't like Trump. The Convention is going on right now -- I usually make about every third one or so -- and I'll be interested to hear the reports from some of my friends. By the way, if you don't know muc about it or how it got started, here's a good article that shows how much of a seat of the pants thing it really was. It was only started in 1982 -- I joined in 1989.
The Weekend at Yale That Changed American Politics
It’s not too extreme to say that one wonky student group founded in 1982 has reshaped the Supreme Court, and the nation. What actually happened at the birth of the Federalist Society?
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/08/27/federalist-society-yale-history-conservative-law-court-219608 (https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/08/27/federalist-society-yale-history-conservative-law-court-219608)
-
Jonathan H. Adler
Orin S. Kerr
John B. Bellinger, III
Marisa C. Maleck
Phillip D. Brady
Lori S. Meyer
George T. Conway III
Paul J. McNulty
Carrie F. Cordero
Alan Charles Raul
Stuart M. Gerson
Tom Ridge
Peter D. Keisler
Paul Rosenzweig
I know Tom Ridge. He is about as Conservative as Nelson Rockefeller. This is a list of backbench garbage no one cares about.
-
So, should we blame Trump or the 95% of DC’s political establishment, i.e. those who put up roadblocks to Trump’s achieving his conservative agenda?
I blame establishment shills like McCain and Flake and Ryan etc.
Well, this past January, Trump was at Camp David with the establishment types and decided to go all in with them. How’d that work out? So, yes....he owns it.
-
A team of lawyers from the conservative Federalist Society, organized by Kellyanne Conway's husband George Conway, have formed a group dedicated to highlighting the Trump administration's perceived flouting of constitutional and legal norms, reports the New York Times.
Looks like the Left is once again trying to create dissension in the ranks. We wouldn't have Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh without the Federalist Society, and the NYSlimes knows that.
-
No. They didn't claim to be speaking for the organization -- just for themselves as individuals who happen to be members. And the statements they've made apart from this written statement also have been very careful to distinguish their own beliefs from that of the organization.
Zero chance they'll be kicked out. One thing that makes the Federalist Society different from almost every similar group is that different views are not silenced. Back when it started, conservatives/originalists were hard to find within the legal profession and law schools, and didn't speak out all that much. As a consequence, the organization has deliberately invited those with dissenting views to participate in conferences, panels, etc.. It's actually very clever, because it essentially broadened the audience and gave it a reputation for fairness. You'd get some big-name people who were judicial activists/Democrats to attend and speak, and they'd usually be very complimentary of how they were treated, etc.. That let you attract more people, and it snowballed.
Basically, the Federalist Society believes that it's ideas are the right ones, and will win in fair debate. So, that's what it pushes.
Now, that's not to say there won't be some blunt disagreements with these guys. There absolutely will be. But they won't be silenced or given the boot just because they don't like Trump. The Convention is going on right now -- I usually make about every third one or so -- and I'll be interested to hear the reports from some of my friends. By the way, if you don't know muc about it or how it got started, here's a good article that shows how much of a seat of the pants thing it really was. It was only started in 1982 -- I joined in 1989.
The Weekend at Yale That Changed American Politics
It’s not too extreme to say that one wonky student group founded in 1982 has reshaped the Supreme Court, and the nation. What actually happened at the birth of the Federalist Society?
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/08/27/federalist-society-yale-history-conservative-law-court-219608 (https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/08/27/federalist-society-yale-history-conservative-law-court-219608)
So interesting, @Maj. Bill Martin After I re-read the post, I realized that this group was not claiming to represent the Federalist Society but just claiming to be a group of members. I still think they were trading on the name of a respected organization to get publicity for their cause, but I guess that's not against the law or the rules.
-
@Emjay @truth_seeker @Maj. Bill Martin @aligncare @Frank Cannon
It is hard to believe that after 2 years of complaints, Cult45 still has no idea why actual conservatives find fault with reckless spending, moral failings, broken promises, and divisive politics. The GOP deserves to lose power as long as they remain oblivious Trump fanboys. Even an alcoholic knows the first step to recovery is recognizing the problem. 88finger point
-
@Emjay @truth_seeker @Maj. Bill Martin @aligncare @Frank Cannon
It is hard to believe that after 2 years of complaints, Cult45 still has no idea why actual conservatives find fault with reckless spending, moral failings, broken promises, and divisive politics. The GOP deserves to lose power as long as they remain oblivious Trump fanboys. Even an alcoholic knows the first step to recovery is recognizing the problem. 88finger point
I'm gonna go ahead and leave you to Frank Cannon. He can probably say it best.
-
@Emjay @truth_seeker @Maj. Bill Martin @aligncare @Frank Cannon
It is hard to believe that after 2 years of complaints, Cult45 still has no idea why actual conservatives find fault with reckless spending, moral failings, broken promises, and divisive politics. The GOP deserves to lose power as long as they remain oblivious Trump fanboys. Even an alcoholic knows the first step to recovery is recognizing the problem. 88finger point
(https://www.nrcc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/veruca-salt.jpg)
I HATE TRUMP! I HATE HIM I HATE HIM I HATE HIM! HE'S MEAN, HE'S LOUD, HE TALKS TOO MUCH, HE SMELLS, AND I HATE HIM!!!! He's a bad bad man daddy, you have to get rid of him! I don't want him there any more daddy, I command you to make him quit being President daddy. And I want a new pony daddy, you are going to get me a new pony.
-
(https://www.nrcc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/veruca-salt.jpg)
I HATE TRUMP! I HATE HIM I HATE HIM I HATE HIM! HE'S MEAN, HE'S LOUD, HE TALKS TOO MUCH, HE SMELLS, AND I HATE HIM!!!! He's a bad bad man daddy, you have to get rid of him! I don't want him there any more daddy, I command you to make him quit being President daddy. And I want a new pony daddy, you are going to get me a new pony.
It's gratifying to know I'm not the only person to think of her after reading that screed.
-
(https://www.nrcc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/veruca-salt.jpg)
I HATE TRUMP! I HATE HIM I HATE HIM I HATE HIM! HE'S MEAN, HE'S LOUD, HE TALKS TOO MUCH, HE SMELLS, AND I HATE HIM!!!! He's a bad bad man daddy, you have to get rid of him! I don't want him there any more daddy, I command you to make him quit being President daddy. And I want a new pony daddy, you are going to get me a new pony.
@Free Vulcan
Looks like I should have pointed my finger at you too oblivious.
-
@Free Vulcan
Looks like I should have pointed my finger at you too oblivious.
You can make a really stupid post but it kinda gets to you when someone points out your own problem.
-
You can make a really stupid post but it kinda gets to you when someone points out your own problem.
I accept your apology @Emjay and I'm amazed at your new found personal insight.