Connect with us

Congress

The Federalist Society isn’t going anywhere

Published

on

President Donald Trump said the Federalist Society gave him “bad advice” on judicial nominations. He’s still appointing their members to the federal bench anyway.

On Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee will consider nominees for seats on the federal bench, including Emil Bove, Trump’s No. 3 at the Justice Department and an outsider to some mainstream conservative legal circles. Bove’s nomination has divided the right over whether Trump was eschewing the traditional conservative Federalist Society pipeline in favor of his own brand of loyalist nominees. But even amid a schism between Trump and the Federalist Society, the president’s orbit has continued to embrace lawyers and jurists who have ties to the most influential conservative legal group.

In a sign of the continued alignment between the Federalist Society and the administration, the Senate Judiciary Committee will also vote Thursday on a different slate of judicial nominees, all five of whom are members of the Federalist Society, according to their disclosures and the Federalist Society website.

“The Federalist Society is just interwoven into the conservative legal establishment,” said Russell Wheeler, a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who studies the judiciary. For all Trump’s indignation, the majority of his picks thus far are “not only Federalist Society members, they’re proud Federalist Society members,” Wheeler said.

The Federalist Society is an influential conservative legal group whose ranks have included some of the nation’s most powerful judges, and its chapters on law school campuses have operated as a training ground for future conservative jurists. In Trump’s first term, the organization’s former Executive Vice President Leonard Leo served as a key adviser to the president on judicial nominations. The White House ultimately nominated and confirmed hundreds of judges to the federal bench, including three Supreme Court justices.

As some of the judges Trump nominated have ruled in ways he doesn’t like — and in particular in the wake of a ruling from the U.S. Court of International Trade that nullified Trump’s tariffs — the president announced in a post on Truth Social that he had cut ties with Leo. He called his onetime adviser on Supreme Court nominees a “sleazebag” and lamented his disappointment in the Federalist Society for the people the organization had recommended.

But it does not appear Republican Senators on the Judiciary Committee — even some of the president’s staunchest allies — share Trump’s new animosity towards the Federalist Society.

“We’ll go to people that I’ve always relied upon to give me advice,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a current member and former chair of the committee. “The Federalist Society, I’ve known for a long time, I’ll still keep talking to [them].”

“I’m going to work with people that want to talk to me,” echoed Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), chair of the committee. “Would we sit down and talk to them and have discussions with them? The answer is, we’ll talk to anybody.”

And others warn that most qualified candidates are still going to come from the group. “Unless they use Federalist Society association as something that actually stops someone from getting a nomination, I don’t think it’s going to make a difference, and if they did take that step, the talent pool would shrink dramatically,” said an individual familiar with the administration’s judicial selection process granted anonymity to speak candidly.

A White House official said in a statement that Trump relies on “his senior advisors, White House Counsel, and the Department of Justice” in the judicial selection process. “The mold by which President Trump chooses judges is that of Justices [Clarence] Thomas and [Samuel] Alito and the late Justice [Antonin] Scalia,” the official said. “Outside entities, including hometown senators, think tanks, and others, are always free to share their recommendations, but the President and his team will be the ultimate decision-makers.”

There has been a notable exception to the administration’s continued affinity for Federalist Society-approved lawyers. Bove, who if confirmed would hold a lifetime seat on the powerful Third Circuit Court of Appeals, has come under scrutiny for his controversial maneuvering to fulfill Trump’s political agenda at the Department of Justice. The president’s one-time criminal defense attorney, not a typical Federalist Society candidate for the federal bench, is facing allegations by a former lawyer at the Department of Justice that he suggested the administration should go against court orders. Some in the conservative legal sphere have questioned his nomination out of concern that he would unduly prioritize loyalty to the president.

Michael Fragoso, former chief counsel to Mitch McConnell, who as Senate Republican leader shepherded the hundreds of nominees that Trump confirmed in his first term, underscored that if the most qualified candidates were Federalist Society members, Trump would still choose them. “If you look at who’s being nominated by and large really, I think Emil [Bove]’s probably the only exception,” said Fragoso, adding that Trump’s second term judicial picks are for the most part, “pretty traditionalist Federalist Society people.” Fragoso is supporting Bove’s nomination.

Behind the scenes, the Federalist Society has continued to angle for influence, despite Trump’s frustration.

Mike Davis, an outside adviser to the White House on judicial nominations, said the Federalist Society’s new president, Sheldon Gilbert, reached out to him around the time he took over the organization in early 2025. Gilbert expressed that he wanted to mend fences with Trump’s orbit, and the two ate lunch together, Davis said. The Federalist Society did not respond to a request for comment.

“Having new leadership is an important step in the right direction, but the problem with [the Federalist Society is] they need to stop being the string orchestra on the Titanic,” said Davis, a former staffer to Grassley. “They want to look majestic as the ship is going down.”

In other words, the Federalist Society needs to supply lawyers who will contribute meaningfully to the president’s legal aims, Davis said.

Trent McCotter, a former Justice Department official and Federalist Society member who worked on judicial nominations during Trump’s first term, feels similarly. He said the number one priority for judicial nominees going forward should be a “proven track record of doing conservative work.”

“Membership in the Federalist Society is a signal, but it’s a relatively weak one,” McCotter said. “What you’ve been doing, putting your name on and filing, arguing in court for the last year or five years or 10 years, those are things that demonstrate much more what a person thinks about the law.”

“There will presumably still be nominees who are members of the Federalist Society,” he said. “It just won’t be the same kind of signal that it used to be.”

Tessa Berenson Rogers contributed to this report.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Congress

Hill Republicans want Trump to solve their internal problems

Published

on

House infighting is threatening to sink the GOP agenda on Capitol Hill. Now Republicans are hoping their most effective whip — President Donald Trump — is ready to come off the sidelines.

The push for the White House to take a more active role comes as the GOP finds itself stalemated on several fronts with no sign that they will be able to navigate a way forward without Trump’s direct intervention.

The House floor was effectively closed for business Tuesday as days of internal negotiations failed to produce a deal among competing GOP factions, allowing Speaker Mike Johnson to extend a soon-to-expire surveillance law or pass the much-anticipated farm bill.

Meanwhile, there’s growing frustration among Senate Republicans and Trump allies that the House hasn’t yet taken up their bill funding most of the Department of Homeland Security after Saturday’s shooting at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Instead, in a bid to satisfy his own members, Johnson wants to make small changes to the bill, which would further drag out the partial shutdown that is already on day 74.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, who is careful to avoid telling the House what to do, was uncharacteristically direct Tuesday with his frustration over the other chamber’s refusal to pass a DHS bill senators have already twice passed unanimously. He suggested Trump needed to intervene.

“We’re trying as best we can to coordinate strategy with the House, but … it’s going to take, obviously, I think the involvement of the White House to bust some of these things loose,” Thune said.

He said to House Republicans who are still criticizing the Senate’s plan, “I guess my question is, what was the alternative? That’s what I said to them at the time. I mean, tell me, give me a better option.”

Republicans on the House Rules Committee agreed Tuesday night to tee up the votes on the spy-powers extension and the farm bill, among other measures, but there’s no guarantee the rest of the House GOP will fall in line Wednesday on the floor.

Trump hasn’t been completely on the sidelines as the House has floundered. He sent a Truth Social message Monday encouraging the House to support a separate budget plan aimed at providing immigration enforcement funding — part of a two-track plan to end the shutdown. His budget office issued a memo Tuesday evening urging support of the Senate-passed legislation funding the rest of the department, which could run out of money to pass employees as soon as next week.

Separately, White House deputies tried earlier this month to pressure House GOP hard-liners to back down in the fight over extending a spy law targeting foreigners abroad known as Section 702.

What’s missing in the minds of some Republican lawmakers is the type of sustained, one-on-one arm-twisting that Trump deployed on House Republicans last year on several occasions — including to push through the GOP’s tax-cuts-focused megabill and to get Johnson elected speaker.

Trump has instead been focused in recent days on the state visit from King Charles III of the United Kingdom, not to mention the military campaign in Iran he launched two months ago alongside Israel.

“Mike’s clearly having to wrestle with his House members, and it’s not his fault,” said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.). “He’s good, but he can’t work miracles. And I think the president’s going to have to step in.”

A White House spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment on Thune’s call for more presidential involvement on Capitol Hill.

One House Republican, who has been in touch with Trump officials and was granted anonymity to describe behind-the-scenes conversations, said the White House wants “DHS fixed this week.” But so far Trump’s arm’s-length overtures haven’t worked with House hard-liners who want to expand the scope of the party-line immigration enforcement bill to encompass other conservative priorities.

Johnson has taken steps to assuage the holdouts. He has offered to attach a key hard-right priority — a permanent ban on the creation of a government-sponsored digital currency — to the spy-law extension before sending it to the Senate. The speaker is separately seeking to appease a group of farm-state members by attaching a year-round ethanol fuel measure to the bill authorizing agriculture programs.

Thune, in an interview, shot down the idea that a Section 702 renewal with a digital currency ban attached could pass the Senate, calling it a “bad idea” that is “not happening.”

Underscoring Johnson’s dilemma, the comments sparked a public rebuke from one of the conservative hard-liners, Missouri Rep. Eric Burlison, who said, “I don’t care what Thune thinks.”

Plenty of Republicans — both centrists and conservatives — are growing frustrated that Johnson isn’t just putting the Senate-approved DHS funding bill, the other part of the party’s two-part plan, on the floor. The bill includes funding for Secret Service paychecks, among other key security-related matters.“This is batshit,” another House Republican said about Johnson’s plan to push through several other bills this week but not yet the DHS fix.

House GOP leaders want to put a reworked DHS funding bill on the House floor Thursday — but only after they clear the separate budget resolution Wednesday.

Scores of conservatives have threatened to tank the Senate-passed bill unless the speaker strips out language that explicitly zeroes out funding for agencies including Immigration and Customs Enforcement. But many Republicans believe those holdouts would quickly cave — and end the record-long DHS shutdown — if Trump would simply apply some pressure.

Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) said in an interview Trump should get more personally involved in pushing House Republicans on both the DHS legislation and the surveillance bill. Rep. Rob Bresnahan (R-Pa.), meanwhile, said in a statement it was “absurd” DHS was still shut down and that it is “beyond time to open the government.”

Thune said Tuesday he also believed House Republicans should “just pass the bill” as GOP leaders discussed whether they could “massage” the contentious ICE funding language to the hard-liners’ liking without threatening its rapid passage in the Senate.

According to two administration officials and a person close to the White House who were granted anonymity to candidly describe the situation, there is little optimism inside DHS that the shutdown will end quickly.

“That is really leading people to question why we even do [our jobs] anymore if Congress can’t do their jobs,” one of the administration officials said.

Within DHS, the feeling is “we all know what the end result is going to be, so just do it — make it happen,” the person close to the White House said. “Instead it continues to drag on and drag on.”

Continue Reading

Congress

House panel moves 3 priority bills toward floor vote

Published

on

House GOP leaders managed to finally clear a rule for the farm bill, a three-year FISA extension and a budget resolution for immigration enforcement spending, after a lengthy Rules Committee hearing Tuesday.

But some Republicans are already threatening to tank the rule when it heads to the floor Wednesday around 10:30 a.m. — leaving a huge task for Speaker Mike Johnson and his leadership team as they wrangle votes. Johnson can only lose a couple of GOP votes with full attendance for the party-line rule vote.

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) told Blue Light News Tuesday night the rule’s fate was at risk in part because of GOP leaders’ plan to tack on language to green-light sales of year-round E15 gasoline blend. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) announced Tuesday she would vote against the rule after many of her amendments introduced in the Rules hearing were voted down. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) also suggested in an X post she will vote against the rule Wednesday.

Continue Reading

Congress

House GOP poised to vote on pesticide language

Published

on

The House is poised to vote this week on whether to keep controversial pesticide language in the farm bill after a revolt from some Republicans and Make America Healthy Again activists.

House GOP leaders drafted a rule Tuesday to move forward with the farm bill and other key legislative priorities this week after overnight negotiations.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) and other MAHA-aligned Republicans have threatened to withhold support for the bill unless the pesticide provision — which bars states from creating pesticide labeling laws that differ from EPA guidance — is stripped.

Luna said Monday she would “BLOW UP the farm bill” if the pesticide language wasn’t removed.

The draft rule, which was obtained by Blue Light News, would still need to clear the committee and be adopted by the House before Luna’s amendment could get a floor vote.

House Agriculture Chair G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.) defended the pesticide language Monday during a Rules Committee hearing, sparring with Democratic lawmakers who slammed the provision as a “liability shield.”

Farm state Republicans have worried the Luna amendment will pass if it’s allowed a floor vote, noting only one Democrat opposed a similar measure in the House Agriculture Committee.

The fight over pesticide manufacturer health risk liability has reached a fever pitch in Washington this week. The Rules Committee’s decision comes the day after the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case weighing whether Bayer, which acquired Monsanto in 2018, should be preempted from failure-to-warn claims for cancer risks associated with pesticide use.

Other amendments made in order to the draft rule include adding hot rotisserie chicken as eligible to be purchased using Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits, banning “painful” dog and cat testing, and repealing the transfer of the Food for Peace international aid program to the Agriculture Department while giving the president authority over the initiative.

The Rules Committee also made in order an amendment from Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.) to remove emissions mandates on farm equipment after she threatened to vote against the rule.

Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Trending