The Future of the Federalist Society

The National Treasure of podcasts.

By and

Haggard and sleep deprived, Sarah and David buckle down for an extra-long episode that covers student loans, court sanctions, gay marriage legislation, more FedSoc speculation, and [deep breath] the founding principles of the United States. Ready thy popcorn.

Show Notes:

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
By and
Comments (115)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Scott Skelton

    I think a good question to ask is whether the Federalist Society has bedrock principles or if they are just "in it to win it" and the new ethic with be "the end justifies the means."

    Collapse
  2. Dhsavidge1

    Please, dear Lord, stop shilling for the FedSoc. Whatever they were in the past, they are glue-sniffing Hillsdale groupies now. Too ad hominem? David and Sarah you are far more intelligent than to continue to participate in this whackadoo institution.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Marc Frischhertz

    Why is the least democratic branch of government the most secretive about its internal decision making process and why do so many lawyers accept this as sacrosanct?

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    RobK

    The discussion at the end of the pod got me thinking about a video I saw featuring Yuval Levin's discussing the birth of the Left and Right from his book The Great Debate.

    There is a nice summary here by the man himself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS-DPX9XYns&t=1s

    This was a discussion that "threw a wrench in the works" for me as I always felt comfortable that the bedrock of many of my own first principles had been laid by John Locke, and I certainly would have bristled at the idea that I would have much common ground with someone like Paine.

    The topic that ended up causing so much internal conflict was the origin of rights. Locke says given by God, and Paine says developed over time - a product of human effort and the power of reason and rhetoric (paraphrasing here - forgive the gross over simplifications).

    Truth be told, I'm still between those horns, but it occurred to me that The Declaration of Independence rests on the idea of inalienable rights, as Sarah discussed, but the Constitution elucidated and enumerated these rights, in effect creating a framework that may be more synthetic than organic? Less teasing meaning from the ether and more, well, good old fashioned debate.

    Perhaps the problem with Natural Rights theory is that the rights being discussed are a bit like cloud formations; from a sufficient distance, there's Mickey riding a bicycle, but get closer, and it's harder and harder to make out the forms. By this I mean, that the Declaration of Independence had natural rights at its basis, but didn't get into specifics because, well, getting into the weeds likely got complicated fast, (without deferring to religious texts, an avenue the Founders clearly wished to avoid).

    "We'll fix it in post." said the signers of the Declaration of Independence? And off it went to King George.

    So what has happened from the time of the framing through now, was in fact a building out of the spirit of what the Declaration of Independence was hoping to get to - liberty and sovereignty for the individual, no matter the meanness of his or her station, (even if by each step we moved farther from the explicit embrace of Natural Law)?

    I'm conscious that for a certain type, these here's is fightin' words! so I'll put out there that I'd like to be convinced of Natural Law, at least as far as squaring things with Locke and Classical Liberalism, as it would fix the dissonance I have with regard to one of my ideological lode stars, but as for now the clanging continues.

    Collapse
  5. Monherr

    Can you comment on whether the House of Representatives has standing to sue in the student loan case, a la House vs. Burnwell regarding the ACA? I've heard this mentioned by WSJ several times but curious if this is actually a thing, especially now that the GOP will control the House next year?

    Second and totally unrelated but David I would be curious your/Nancy's thoughts on the Rockstar Cheer lawsuits filed in multiple states now by Bakari Sellers and the Strohm law firm in SC? Sounds like Larry Nassar, on steroids. I recently heard that the Rockstar organization's child protection plan was designed by none other than Rick Braschler, who had the same role in the Kanakuk camps. It's as mind-boggling as it is upsetting and disheartening.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Njh2005

    I believe the Declaration is the “why” to the Constitution’s “how.” The design of the government the Constitution provides for makes little sense but for the overarching purpose of protecting our unalienable rights.
    I would also note the Declaration does not say we are born with unalienable rights but created with them. That would suggest those rights (such as life) attach at conception.

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Ann-Marie Inglis

    off topic, can you guys provide an update on where the 2 cases from texas and florida on social media legislation is currently at, is any of it in effect? I havent seen any news on these cases lately with all the noise being about twitter, FTX and the mid terms. curious as to your insights on what's next for these cases
    thanks, love your work!

    Collapse
  8. Jksjo

    This was a good Podcast that became a great one during the discussion of the Declaration of Independence. The description of it as a “Mission Statement,” was succinct and helped frame it quite well for me.

    Collapse
  9. Scott Skelton

    Please do a podcast on the alleged leaks by Alito regarding the Hobby Lobby opinion.

    Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    Marc Frischhertz

    Where is the Court on its investigation of the leak of Dobbs decision? News reports aren't very favorable to Justice Alito and suddenly the right wing doesn't seem very interested in the investigation.

    Rev. Rob Schenck, an anti-abortion crusader, has come out as a whistleblower and is claiming that Alito told a close friend in 2014 how the Hobby Lobby decision would come out and that he, Alito, was writing the opinion. The Rev. also seems to have emails that corroborate his account. Alito released a statement denying the account, but there already is far more evidence that Alito was the leaker than there is for many things the republican House plans to hold hearing about.

    Collapse
Load More