Source: https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/feddieSoc.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 18:36:51+00:00

Document:
There is nothing illegal or unethical about an administration being so heavily staffed and influenced by individuals who are affiliated with a single organization. However, the American people deserve to be fully informed about any organization that has assumed such a central role in shaping policies and determining appointees for the Bush administration. Contrary to the charges of Federalist Society members, there is nothing inappropriate or McCarthyite about such an effort to inform the public. Indeed, if the organization in question were People For the American Way, it's a safe bet that Federalist Society members themselves would be vigorously arguing that Americans should closely examine the values and goals that guide the organization.
To better inform the public debate, this report explores the Federalist Society and its members and allies -- examining their legal and policy objectives, their prevailing philosophy, as well as the kind of impact they could have through their influence within and outside the Bush administration on the law, the courts, the Constitution and ordinary citizens.
Founded in 1982 by students at the Yale and University of Chicago law schools, the Federalist Society was initially nurtured by law professors such as Robert Bork and Antonin Scalia.  The Society served as a meeting ground for those who felt out of step with the perceived liberal bent of their schools' curriculum. To this day, the Society continues to attract lawyers, scholars and elected officials whose opinions closely parallel the right-wing views of Bork, Scalia, and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
The Scaife Foundation has also funded the Federalist Society, along with a long list of other right-wing efforts. These include the American Spectator and its "Arkansas Project" -- a $2.4 million campaign to gather information for the expressed purpose of discrediting former President Bill Clinton and potentially forcing him out of office.
The Society's constitutional law reading list is similarly revealing and is introduced with this glib pronouncement: "There are two kinds of constitutional lawyers: those who take the text of the Constitution seriously, and those who don't. Much of what is wrong with the American polity today is traceable, directly or indirectly, to the latter, who greatly outnumber the former."  Four names account for more than half of the individually authored recommended books and articles on this reading list: Bork, Scalia, Richard A. Epstein and Lino Graglia. What are their views on constitutional freedoms and civil rights?
The Society's "Journalist's Guide to Legal Experts" -- a Web site inventory of attorneys and scholars to whom the organization steers the news media -- offers additional evidence of the group's overriding right-wing philosophy. While the Society's Web site points out that the views of these experts are their own, it also makes quite clear that the Society promotes them as espousing conservative and libertarian philosophies. Although conservatives and libertarians across the country hold differing views on many of the subjects listed, the views of those recommended by the Society on a number of specific controversial issues are strikingly uniform.
In the face of clear evidence of the Federalist Society's pervasive ideological bent, Volokh and other spokespersons expect us to believe that the organization has no desire to convert its ideology into legislative, judicial or political action. Volokh has claimed that the Society's charter "is to create discussion, not to lobby," and Assistant U.S. Attorney General and Society member Viet Dinh has described the organization merely as "a forum for discussion of law and public policy from both sides."  Although the Federalist Society does sponsor debates and does not lobby or file briefs in the mold of a traditional advocacy organization, it is evident that the Society does aggressively promote its ideological point of view.
The Federalist Society's overall methods were best captured by its own executive director, Eugene Meyer, in a 1996 guest editorial in a Heritage Foundation publication. Meyer wrote that his organization "has built a network designed to overcome legal abuses and to return America to a legal system which operates according to the design of the founders."  Through this network of right-wing lawyers, government officials, scholars and judges, the Society seeks to fundamentally remake the American legal system.
Activities by the Federalist Society and some of its prominent members on such subjects as congressional authority and civil rights reveal the scope of the changes the group seeks to bring about in America's legal landscape. As its name suggests, the organization warmly embraces its version of the concept of "federalism" -- limiting federal authority to areas such as national defense and ceding most powers to states and localities. While many Americans respect the right of state and local governments to make certain decisions, leading members of the Society take federalism to an extreme by seeking to block the ability of the federal government to enact and enforce laws protecting the environment, civil rights, workplace health and safety, and other areas.
Many of those who hold key leadership positions in the Federalist Society have campaigned to dramatically undermine civil and constitutional rights protections. Many of these leaders help oversee the Society's practice groups on civil rights and constitutional liberties.
The writings, speeches or activities of Federalist Society members often set the stage for broader action by those on the right. As an illustration, consider President George W. Bush's recent announcement ending the role of the nonpartisan American Bar Association in reviewing the qualifications of potential judicial nominees for the federal courts prior to their nomination. Actions taken several years ago by Society members helped to encourage President Bush's decision to terminate the ABA's nearly half-century-old service. Since the Eisenhower administration, the ABA has provided an important service to presidents of both parties and the nation by vetting the qualifications of those under consideration for lifetime appointment to the federal judiciary.
Long after Hatch's 1997 announcement, the Federalist Society stayed on the attack, constantly raising concerns about the ABA -- frequently voicing allegations ("Critics have charged that the ABA's recent. . .") as if the Society were simply a neutral observer.  In January 2000, the Society began its ABA "voter guide" project, reporting on the issue positions of candidates for ABA's top offices.  The unceasing attacks and pressure that Society and other right-wing groups used to sully the ABA's image were instrumental in encouraging and providing "cover" for President Bush's decision to end the ABA's pre-nomination review. In fact, the recommendation to eliminate the ABA role came directly from the White House counsel's office, which is heavily staffed by Federalist Society members.
As People For the American Way Foundation extensively documented in its 2000 report, Courting Disaster, a Supreme Court majority that shared the views of Justices Scalia and Thomas -- and the Federalist Society -- would put at grave risk many of the most fundamental rights and liberties that Americans have come to take for granted. A Scalia-Thomas Court could overturn more than 100 key precedents protecting a wide range of civil and constitutional rights. Given that one out of three decisions in the most recent term of the Supreme Court were decided by 5-4 votes, future nominees will play a pivotal role.  In short, a Scalia-Thomas majority could overturn, in whole or in part, Supreme Court precedents on the right to privacy, reproductive freedom, civil rights, religious liberties, environmental protection, worker and consumer rights, and many other fundamental rights.
James Piereson, executive director of the right-wing John M. Olin Foundation, recently assessed the progress of groups such as the Federalist Society. "While Reagan was conservative," Piereson said, "he didn't have this network to turn to when he was filling jobs. It is satisfying to see all these Federalist Society members in the White House."  And those Society members have been hard at work, laying the groundwork for appointments that could dramatically reshape the federal judiciary.
Instead of lobbying or advocating in a very public and traditional manner, the Society is now working from powerful positions within the White House, the Justice Department and throughout the Bush administration. The Society's ambitions are not only to drive the nation's legal policies far to the right, but to lock in these changes for decades to come by controlling appointments to the federal court system. C. Boyden Gray, a Society member who served as White House counsel under Bush's father, has encouraged the younger Bush to use nominations for lifetime appointments to the federal courts to help create a legacy for his administration. "A president can put his or her stamp on the judiciary for a lot longer than he or she can the executive branch," said Gray.  Indeed, he can -- and if the Federalist Society has its way, President Bush will.
It's true that Federalist Society members, like all other Americans, have the constitutionally protected right to hold and express their own views and to join together with like-minded people in pursuit of shared goals. But it's also true that ideas have consequences. And the consequences of the ideas that leaders of the Federalist Society are promoting for the courts and the nation would be disastrous for Americans' fundamental rights.
Dana Milbank, Washington Post, March 25, 2001; Milbank explains that Bush's "appointments have come as a surprise even to conservative leaders, who expected Bush, particularly after the disputed election, to follow a centrist path closer to his father's."
Quote by Edward J. Feulner, president of the Heritage Foundation, is taken from The New York Times, March 18, 2001.
Thomas B. Edsall, "Federalist Society Becomes a Force in Washington," Washington Post, April 18, 2001, p. A4.
Dana Milbank, "White House Counsel Office Now Full of Clinton Legal Foes," Washington Post, January 30, 2001, p. A8.
David Wagner, "When Conservatives Lay Down the Law," Insight, August 10, 1998.
Jerry M. Landay, "The Conservative Cabal That's Transforming American Law," Washington Monthly, March 2000, accessed online July 10, 2001.
"The Federalist Society and the Challenge to a Democratic Jurisprudence," Institute for Democracy Studies, January 2001, pp. 5, 7-10, 29-32.
Nina J. Easton, Gang of Five: Leaders at the Center of the Conservative Crusade, 2000 (Simon & Schuster: New York, NY), p.193; Allan Freedman, "Republicans Concede Missteps in Effort to Rewrite Rules," Congressional Quarterly, December 2, 1995, p. 3645.
The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, Annual Report, Fiscal Year 1998, pp. 295-297.
See "Nomination of William Bradford Reynolds to be Associate Attorney General of the United States," Hearings Before the Senate Judiciary Committee (99th Cong., 1st Sess. (SHrg.99-3374) (June 4, 5, and 18, 1985).
Id. at 887, 971 (Statement by Senator Specter).
Nina J. Easton, Gang of Five: Leaders at the Center of the Conservative Crusade, 2000 (Simon & Schuster: New York, NY), p.193.
"Board of Visitors" The Federalist Society, accessed on June 7, 2001.
Gerald Walpin, "Emperor Miranda Has No Clothes But the Reno Justice Department Instructed Its Staff Not to Say So," accessed on June 7, 2001 from.
Gerald Walpin, "A Scholarly and Courageous Treatise on the Victory of Obscenity over Morality," accessed on June 6, 2001 from.
Lillian BeVier, "What Privacy Is Not," 12 Harv. J. Law & Policy 99, 1989.
"Time to Decommission this Commission: Has the United States Commission on Civil Rights Outlived its Purpose?" panel sponsored by the Independent Women's Forum, February 29, 2000, transcript accessed June 17, 2001 from.
The remaining two members of the Federalist Society's board of visitors are Lois Haight Herrington, a Contra Costa County (Calif.) Superior Court judge and former Assistant Attorney General under President Reagan, and Andrew J. Redleaf, who is founder and CEO of Whitebox Advisors, a money management firm.
"The Federalist Society and the Challenge to a Democratic Jurisprudence," Institute for Democracy Studies, January 2001, pp. 29-32.
Text is taken from the Federalist Society's Lawyers Division Membership Application.
Membership information accessed July 5, 2001. The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, Annual Report, Fiscal Year 1998, pp. 18-19.
The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, Annual Report, Fiscal Year 1998, pp. 10.
"Schedule of Grants" 1999, John M. Olin Foundation Inc. Web site.
Tamar Lewin, "3 Conservative Foundations Are in the Throes of Change," The New York Times, May 20, 2001.
Barbara Miner, "The Power And the Money: Bradley Foundation Bankrolls Conservative Agenda," Rethinking Schools, Spring 1994, Volume 8, Number 3, p. 17.
"Author Backs Off Anita Hill Attacks," Associated Press, Washington, D.C., June 27, 2001.
Mike Allen, "Bush Aims to Get Faith Initiative Back on Track," Washington Post, June 25, 2001, p. A1.
Robert Parry, "D(OIL)E: What wouldn't Bob Do for Koch Oil?" The Nation, August 26, 1996.
"20 Years of Advancing Civil Society," Cato Institute Timeline, 1977-1997, accessed July 5, 2001.
"How the Scaremongers Drive Up Home Prices," Cato Online, accessed July 5, 2001; Doug Bandow, "Minimum Wage Redux," Cato: Today's Commentary, November 1, 1999, accessed July 5, 2001.
Cursor's Media Transparency, "Recipients by amount granted by the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation,".
Aimee Howd, "Law Schools vs. Dissenting Views," Insight, November 29, 1999.
Eugene Volokh, "Our Flaw? We're Just Not Liberals," Washington Post, June 3, 2001, B3.
Michael DeBow and Roger Clegg, The Conservative and Libertarian Pre-Law Reading List: An Introduction to American Law for Undergraduates and Others, February 10, 1999, accessed July 5, 2001.
"Rolling Back the New Deal: Judicial Review of Economic Regulations," a conference on March 28, 2001 sponsored by the Federalist Society's Chicago lawyers chapter and the Society's environmental law practice.
Michael DeBow and Roger Clegg, "The Conservative and Libertarian Pre-Law Reading List: An Introduction to American Law for Undergraduates and Others," accessed June 21, 2001.
Robert Bork, "Civil Rights -- A Challenge," New Republic, August 31, 1963; Bork also wrote a subsequent article that challenged the public accommodations and employment provisions of the then-proposed Civil Rights Act. This article was published in the Chicago Tribune (March 4, 1964).
Hearings before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on the Nomination of Robert H. Bork to be U.S. Solicitor General, January 17, 1973.
Robert H. Bork, Slouching Towards Gomorrah,1996, HarperCollins, New York, N.Y., p. 117.
Robert H. Bork, The New York Times, Letters to the Editor, December 12, 2000.
"Robert H. Bork Critiques Libertarianism," excerpt from pages 150-152 of Bork's book Slouching Towards Gomorrah, 1996, HarperCollins Publishers; accessed July 9, 2001.
Leonard W. Levy, "The New Right Against the Old Rights," Los Angeles Times, November 12, 1989.
Zadvyas v. Davis, dissent of Justice Scalia, joined by Thomas, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 99-7791, decision released on June 28, 2001.
"High Court Overturns Death Sentence with Rebuke to State Court," The New York Times, March 20, 2001.
Garrett Epps, "A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law (Book Reviews)," The Nation, January 27, 1997.
Richard A. Epstein, "The Mistakes of 1937," George Mason University Law Review, Volume 11, Number 2, 1988, p. 11.
Nina J. Easton, Gang of Five: Leaders at the Center of the Conservative Crusade, 2000, Simon & Schuster, New York, N.Y., p. 67.
Richard A. Epstein, "Deconstructing Privacy: And Putting It Back Together Again," University of Chicago Law School, John M. Olin Law & Economics Working Paper No. 75, April 1999, accessed July 9, 2001.
Lino Graglia, "Is Affirmative Action on the Way Out? Should It Be?" A Symposium, Commentary, March 1998 issue, accessed July 9, 2001; Georgia House of Representatives, H.R. 1139, a resolution denouncing the racist statements of Professor Lino Graglia; and for other purposes, accessed June 1, 2001.
"Conservative and Libertarian Legal Scholarship: An Annotated Bibliography," The Federalist Society, accessed July 2, 2001.
Lino A. Graglia, "`Constitutional Theory': The Attempted Justification for the Supreme Court's Liberal Political Program," Texas Law Review, March Volume 65, 1987.
Lino A. Graglia, "From Federal Union to National Monolith: Mileposts in the Demise of American Federalism," Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, Volume 16, 1993, p. 131.
Michael DeBow and Roger Clegg, "The Conservative and Libertarian Pre-Law Reading List: An Introduction to American Law for Undergraduates and Others," accessed July 16, 2001.
"H.R. 1139, a resolution denouncing the racist statements of Professor Lino Graglia; and for other purposes," Georgia House of Representatives, accessed June 1, 2001.
ibid; "UT Professor Has Freedom of Speech, Should Use Tact," The Daily University Star Online, September 17, 1997, accessed July 9, 2001.
"Law Denying Gay Protection Stands," The Cincinnati Enquirer, October 14, 1998, accessed July 5, 2001.
Kristen Delguzzi, "Gay Rights in City Set Back," Cincinnati Enquirer, online edition, October 24, 1997, accessed July 16, 2001.
Charles Rice, "Inconsistent View of Homosexuality," The Observer, Notre Dame University, March 8, 2000, accessed July 6, 2001.
"To Reaffirm Marriage: A Statement on the Definition of Marriage From Law Professors Across the World," June 29, 1999, accessed July 9, 2001.
"Journalist's Guide to Legal Experts," The Federalist Society, accessed July 9,2001.
"NRA Gives Gun Control Group an `F' in History and Civics," U.S. Newswire, press statement, February 15, 2000.
Dave Kopel and Eugene Volokh, "Loaded Guns Can Be Good for Kids," Cato Institute: Today's Commentary, June 1, 1999, accessed July 12, 2001.
Eugene Volokh, "Our Flaw? We're Just Not Liberals," Washington Post, June 3, 2001, p.B3; "Exchange" Washington Post, June 3, 2001, p. B3.
"How to Form and Run a Federalist Society Student Chapter," accessed July 12, 2001.
Aimee Howd, "Law Schools vs. Dissenting Views," a 1999 article that was accessed on May 29, 2001.
Eugene B. Meyer, "A Tyranny of the Judiciary?" reprinted from November 1996 issue of Insider, a Heritage Foundation publication, accessed July 5, 2001.
Curtis Moore, "Lawsuit Against Clean Air Act by Members of Congress Raises Conflict-of-Interest Questions," guest commentary, Center for Public Integrity, August 29, 2000, accessed July 5, 2001.
Robert Bodi, "Judicial Activism: A Threat to Democracy," Federalist Society chapter newsletter, University of Akron (OH) School of Law, September 2, 1999.
"Federalism Revived? The Printz and City of Boerne Decisions," a panel discussion sponsored by the Federalist Society's federalism and separation of powers practice group in Washington, D.C., October 17, 1997; transcript of the panel was accessed July 11, 2001.
Transcript of "Federalism Revived?," a panel sponsored by the Federalist Society, held in Washington, D.C., on October 17, 1997.
Michael DeBow and Roger Clegg, The Conservative and Libertarian Pre-Law Reading List: An Introduction to American Law for Undergraduates and Others, February 10, 1999, p.6, accessed July 5, 2001.
Jeffrey Sutton, "City of Boerne v. Flores: A Victory for Federalism,".
Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett, No. 99-1240, U.S. Supreme Court decision issued on February 21, 2001.
Senator Robert Dole, whose suffered a wartime wound that limited his use of one arm, is a strong supporter of ADA. Dole not only voted for the Act, but he recently made a public appearance with professional golfer Casey Martin and filed a court brief in support of Martin's ADA lawsuit -- Martin won a 7-2 Supreme Court ruling in May 2001 that forces golf officials to allow him to use a motorized cart in tournaments since walking is very painful for Martin. Former President Bush, of course, signed ADA into law in 1990, and he voiced enthusiastic support for the measure -- even filing a court brief in University of Alabama v. Garrett in support of the two Alabama state employees who filed the original suit. In a July 26, 2001 official White House statement, President George W. Bush pointed to his father's support for ADA, noting that "my father saw the need for a comprehensive law to liberate the energies and talents of people with disabilities"
Quote from news release, ADA Watch, May 19, 2001.
"The Federalist Society and the Challenge to a Democratic Jurisprudence," Institute for Democracy Studies, January 2001, p. 13.
Robert George and William Saunders, "Romer v. Evans: The Supreme Court's Assault on Popular Sovereignty," May 29, 2001.
Hopwood v. State of Texas, 78F.3d 932 (5th Cir. 1996), cert denied,518 U.S. 1022 (1996).
Reno v. Bossier Parish School District, 528 U.S.320 (2000); "CIR's Greatest Courtroom Victories,".
Gail Heriot Bio in California Civil Rights Initiative; "Decision Is Deadly," U-Wire, December 7, 2000, accessed July 13, 2001.
The Center for Equal Opportunity's strong opposition to affirmative action was evidenced by information on its Web site, accessed July 12, 2001.
Gerard V. Bradley, "Divine Mirth," Catholic Dossier, May-June 1998, accessed on June 7, 2001.
Text of 1997 letter accessed from the Federal Society's Web site.
"NAACP's Parent Trap," Center-Right, Issue 2, March 9, 1998; confirmed by May 31, 2001 telephone conversation with Institute for Justice staffer.
"NAACP's Parent Trap," Center-Right, Issue 2, March 9, 1998; Libertarian Party positions were drawn from the Web site, May 28, 2001.
"The Federalist Society and the Challenge to a Democratic Jurisprudence," Institute for Democracy Studies, January 2001, pp. 31.
"Who Are We?" Federalist Society Web site, May 30, 2001.
Text of a February 24, 1997, letter from U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch to his colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Text of a speech delivered on February 18, 1997, by U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch to the Federalist Society chapter at University of Utah Law School.
"The Federalist Society and the Challenge to a Democratic Jurisprudence," Institute for Democracy Studies, January 2001, p. 19.
Nadine Strossen, "A Constitutional Litmus Test," American Prospect, June 23, 1993. Strossen quotes a 1985 Newsweek article that described the powerful role of Grover Rees III who screened "potential nominees for ideological irregularity"; "The Federalist Society and the Challenge to a Democratic Jurisprudence," Institute for Democracy Studies, January 2001, p. 3, describes the role of Federalist Society co-founder Lee Liberman Otis who screened candidates for the federal courts under President George H. W. Bush.
Roger J. Miner, "Remark: Advise And Consent in Theory and Practice," The American University Law Review, Summer 1992, 41 Am. U.L. Rev. 1075.
Edward Lazarus, Closed Chambers: The Rise, Fall and Future of the Modern Supreme Court (New York: Penguin Books), 1999, p.264.
"A Battle for the Courts," The New York Times, May 11, 2001.
Robert George and William Saunders, "Romer v. Evans: The Supreme Court's Assault on Popular Sovereignty,", May 29, 2001.
Denis Steven Rutkus, "Judicial Nominations by President Clinton During the 103rd-106th Congresses," Congressional Research Service, Report Updated on February 21, 2001.
Linda Greenhouse, "The Court and the Triumph of Discord," The New York Times, July 15, 2001.
Neil A. Lewis, "President Moves Quickly on Judgeships," The New York Times, March 11, 2001.
See http://www.ncil.org/sutton.htm, accessed July 16, 2001.
Robert S. Greenberger, "As Hearings on Judicial Nominees Begin, Senate Panel Reserves Fireworks for Fall," Wall Street Journal, July 11, 2001.
Michael W. McConnell, "Roe v. Wade at 25: Still Illegitimate," Wall Street Journal, January 22, 1998, p. A18; William Glaberson, "In New Senate, New Scrutiny of Judicial Nominees," The New York Times, May 30, 2001, p. A18; "The American We Seek: A Statement of Pro-Life Principle and Concern," First Things, May 1996, p.1.
"Bush Wants to Place Anti-Separationist Law Professor on Federal Court," Church and State, June 2001, p. 15.
Texans for Public Justice, "Bush's Judicial Intent: Fake Moderate, Veer Right," Texas Supreme Court Dollar Docket, May 10, 2001.
In re Jane Doe, 19 S.W.3d 346, 366 (Tex. 2000) (Gonzales, J., concurring).
"Judge Carolyn Kuhl," fact sheet of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL), accessed July 16, 2001.
Bob Jones University v. U.S., 461 U.S. 574 (1983).
Paul M. Barrett, "A Movement Called Law and Economics Sways Legal Circles," Wall Street Journal, August 4, 1986, p. 1.
Elizabeth A. Palmer, "For Bush's Judicial Nominees: A Tough Tribunal Awaits," Congressional Quarterly Weekly, April 28, 2001, p. 898.
"Who Are We?", May 30, 2001.
"The Federalist Society and the Challenge to a Democratic Jurisprudence,", accessed May 30, 2002, Institute for Democracy Studies, January 2001, pp. 1-32; Timothy Noah, "It's Mid-May. Do You Know Where Dubya's Florida Legal Team Is?" Slate.com, May 16, 2001, file was accessed on June 1, 2001; PR Newswire, December 14, 2000, 3:01 p.m. (New York); "The ABA and Criminal Justice Issues: An Informational Report of the Criminal Law and Procedure Practice Group of the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies," August 1997, accessed July 12, 2001; Lawyers division, chapter presidents, accessed July 16, 2001; Jerry M. Landay, "The Conservative Cabal That's Transforming American Law," Washington Monthly, March 2000, accessed online July 10, 2001; Online Newsroom, National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL),; List of people recommended by the Federalist Society as "legal experts" on specific topics, accessed June 1, 2001.
The Akron Beacon Journal has reported that Cook is a member of the Federalist Society, although this is not reflected in Cook's questionnaire responses to the Senate Judiciary Committee. See "Cooked With Care: The First Batch of Bush Judicial Nominees? The White House Follows the Election Returns," The Beacon Journal, May 11, 2001, accessed July 10, 2001.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 V. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.