Josh Blackman (South Texas; Google Scholar), What is the Future of the Federalist Society?:
Over the past four decades, the Federalist Society (FedSoc) has climbed from an obscure organization to the apex of influence. What started as a group of students criticizing the liberal legal order has now become the embodiment of the prevailing conservative jurisprudence. The recent National Lawyers Convention provided an opportunity to toast the FedSoc's successes, and there is much to celebrate. But this moment also presents something of an inflection point. For nearly half a century, FedSoc has followed the same playbook under the same leadership: a debating society that does not take any position on legal issues. But Eugene Meyer, the society's stalwart and venerated President, [steps down today and Sheldon Gilbert becomes its second President] … [T]he conservative legal movement should take stock of what the future portends for FedSoc. . . .
[T]here are headwinds. First, there is a long-simmering tension between social conservatives and the libertarian wings of the movement. For example, in the leadup to the landmark Dobbs decision, which overruled Roe v. Wade, FedSoc's national convention largely ignored the abortion issue. To this day, many social conservatives still feel slighted. Second, FedSoc has long favored a strong deregulatory focus, which was a priority of the Reagan Administration. However, the Trumpism of the Republican party seeks to use government power to promote conservative goals. Third, FedSoc has long favored the lowercase-c approach to conservatism: moderation and restraint. This jurisprudence was a natural choice when originalism and conservatism were minority viewpoints on the Supreme Court. But now, and for the foreseeable future, the roles have reversed. Judges with courage have more cache than those seeking passive restraint.
While FedSoc may still see itself as a mere debating society, critics on the left see FedSoc as a force of evil. The terrain has changed. There is a relentless campaign to delegitimize conservative jurisprudence altogether. … On campuses, FedSoc speakers, including federal judges, are protested as enemies.
The metaphorical firing line has become an actual firing line for conservative lawyers. At the recent convention, Judge James C. Ho of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals argued that to FedSoc’s “critics, this isn’t a debate—it’s a war.” And if it is a war, the battle plans of days gone by may no longer work. Indeed, the FedSoc’s quaint mission statement has not been changed since the series finale of M*A*S*H. …
I have been a devoted member of FedSoc since my first year of law school in 2006. I deeply hope that FedSoc maintains its relevance and influence for another four decades. But I worry that the celebrated approach that worked to climb the sunrise side of the mountain may lead to its decline on the other side. What is that new approach? I do not know, and it should be, as is true to FedSoc's core, a matter of debate. However, maintaining the status quo is not sustainable.
Editor's Note: If you would like to receive a daily email with links to legal education posts on TaxProf Blog, email me here.
