Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Amanda Hollis Brusky to explore the split between The Federalist Society and Donald J Trump. They discuss the potential consequences for the law and the Supreme Court. Amicus Plus segment covers the Supreme Court's new ethics code.
The split between the conservative legal movement and Donald Trump raises questions about the extent to which the law can be pushed before it becomes lawless under his presidency.
The Federalist Society is facing a dilemma as Trump seeks more radical legal advisors, causing tensions between the mainstream conservative legal establishment and the more extreme elements associated with Trump.
Deep dives
The Impact of Trump's Legal Strategies
The podcast episode discusses how much of what Donald Trump wants cannot be achieved through the law, leading to the question of how far the law can be pushed before it becomes lawless. The episode highlights the Supreme Court's adoption of a new ethics code and the potential remaking of the judiciary, civil service, justice department, and immigration law under a Trump presidency. However, recent reporting suggests that Trump may no longer be satisfied with the conservative legal movement represented by Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society. The episode explores the implications of these developments and their impact on the conservative legal movement.
The Role of Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society
The podcast delves into the significance of Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society in shaping the conservative legal movement. It traces the origins of the Federalist Society as a small student group at Yale Law School and its subsequent expansion. The episode highlights Leo's role in aligning the Federalist Society with Donald Trump, leading to the appointment of conservative judges and justices. However, recent indications suggest that Trump is now seeking more radical legal advisors and causing questions about how the Federalist Society will respond to this shift in priorities.
The Dilemma of the Conservative Legal Movement
The podcast episode raises the question of whether the conservative legal movement, represented by the Federalist Society, is facing a dilemma. It examines the tensions between the mainstream conservative legal establishment and the more radical elements associated with Trump. The episode explores the challenges faced by Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society in reconciling their traditional approach with Trump's more extreme agenda. It also considers the consequences of this dilemma, both for the conservative legal movement and for the overall perception of the courts and legal institutions.
The Uncertainty of the Future
The podcast episode expresses concerns about the future of the legal landscape under Trump's influence. It highlights the potential risks of pushing the boundaries of the law and the impact on the legitimacy of legal institutions. The episode also examines the role of Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh in shaping the Supreme Court's approach, suggesting a more moderate stance compared to previous expectations. Ultimately, it raises the overarching fear that the legal system could be undermined, leading to lawlessness and a breakdown of institutional norms.
Donald J Trump is signaling a split with the conservative legal movement’s kingmakers, The Federalist Society. Instead, the presumptive Republican Presidential nominee is planning a radical (and radically lawless) remaking of American government in his image. On this week’s show, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Amanda Hollis Brusky, professor of politics at Pomona College and author of Ideas with Consequences: The Federalist Society & the Conservative Counterrevolution, and coauthor of Separate But Faithful: The Christian Right’s Radical Struggle to Transform Law and Legal Culture. Together, they explore what the split between the right’s legal project of 40 years and the man who hopes to be the next Republican President means for the law, the rule of law, and the U.S. Supreme Court.
In this week’s Amicus Plus segment, Dahlia is joined by Jay Willis of Balls and Strikes to discuss the Supreme Court’s new ethics code. Spoiler: It’s not really new. As Jay says, think of it more like frat house rules published for the benefit of naive parents.