Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumStopping Clinton from appointing Scalia’s replacement is no longer a good enough reason to support..
For many conservative intellectuals, stopping Clinton from appointing Scalias replacement is no longer a good enough reason to support Trump. Among the Republican politicians who have capitulated, such as Ted Cruz, holding the Scalia seat is a favorite talking point to justify supporting someone who they privately see as dangerously authoritarian. But 29 top conservative legal scholars have signed onto a letter arguing that it is not enough. The Originalists against Trump do not believe Trump would protect the Constitution. And they do not trust him to actually pick from his list of 21. More importantly, we do not trust him to respect constitutional limits in the rest of his conduct in office, of which judicial nominations are only one part, they write. The group understands that the alternative is Clinton. Yet our countrys commitment to its Constitution is not so fragile that it can be undone by a single administration or a single court, they conclude.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2016/10/19/daily-202-the-supreme-court-will-be-a-focus-of-tonight-s-presidential-debate/5806cdb8e9b69b640f54c6a8/
Originalists Against Trump
We, the undersigned lawyers and scholars, are committed to the original meaning of the Constitution of the United States. We write to oppose the election of Donald Trump.
Our Constitution vests in a single person the executive power of the United States. In light of his character, judgment, and temperament, we would not vest that power in Donald Trump.
Many Americans still support Trump in the belief that he will protect the Constitution. We understand that belief, but we do not share it. Trumps long record of statements and conduct, in his campaign and in his business career, have shown him indifferent or hostile to the Constitutions basic featuresincluding a government of limited powers, an independent judiciary, religious liberty, freedom of speech, and due process of law.
The President must take care that the laws be faithfully executed; he admires dictators as above the law.
The President must serve as Commander in Chief, enforcing rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces; he praises armed repression and makes light of the laws of war.
The President must hold a public trust on behalf of all Americans; he courts those who would deny to others the equal protection of the laws.
The President must preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution; he has treated the legal system as a tool for arbitrary and discriminatory ends, especially against those who criticize him or his policies.
We also understand the argument that Trump will nominate qualified judicial candidates who will themselves be committed to the Constitution and the rule of law.
Notwithstanding those he has already named, we do not trust him to do so. More importantly, we do not trust him to respect constitutional limits in the rest of his conduct in office, of which judicial nominations are only one part.
Whatever reasons there might be to support Donald Trump, the Constitution is not among them.
We are under no illusions about the choices posed by this electionor about whether Hillary Clinton, were she elected, would be any friend to originalism. Yet our countrys commitment to its Constitution is not so fragile that it can be undone by a single administration or a single court. Originalism has faced setbacks before; it has recovered. Whoever wins in November, it will do so again.
Originalism is a commitment to the Constitution, not to any one political party. And not every person who professes support for originalism is therefore prepared to be President. We happen to see Trump as uniquely unsuited to the office, and we will not be voting for him.
We urge all like-minded Americans to vote their consciences in November. And we call on them, through their voices and their ballots, to deny the executive power of the United States to a man as unfit to wield it as Donald Trump.
Signatures
Prof. Jonathan H. Adler
Case Western Reserve University School of Law
Prof. William Baude
University of Chicago Law School
Prof. Josh Blackman
Houston College of Law
Prof. Steven G. Calabresi
Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law
Oren Cass
Domestic Policy Director, Romney-Ryan 2012
Prof. Bernard J. Dobski
Assumption College
Prof. Richard A. Epstein
New York University School of Law
Hoover Institution
University of Chicago Law School
Prof. Christopher Green
University of Mississippi School of Law
Josh Hammer
Attorney
Jameson Jones
Attorney
Prof. Richard Kay
University of Connecticut School of Law
Prof. Benjamin Kleinerman
James Madison College, Michigan State University
Prof. Stephen F. Knott
Author of Washington and Hamilton: The Alliance That Forged America
Yuval Levin
The Ethics and Public Policy Center
Prof. Nathan B. Oman
William & Mary Law School
Prof. Michael Stokes Paulsen
University of St. Thomas School of Law
Prof. David G. Post
Temple University Law School (ret.)
Prof. Jeremy A. Rabkin
Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
Prof. Stephen E. Sachs
Duke University School of Law
Kristen Silverberg
Former U.S. Ambassador to the European Union
Prof. Steven D. Smith
University of San Diego School of Law
Prof. Stephen F. Smith
Notre Dame Law School
Prof. Ilya Somin
Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
Prof. Kevin C. Walsh
University of Richmond School of Law
Adam White
Hoover Institution
Prof. Greg Weiner
Assumption College
Prof. Keith E. Whittington
Princeton University
George F. Will
Columnist
Prof. Michael P. Zuckert
University of Notre Dame
Prof. Eric R. Claeys
Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
Adam Conrad
Attorney
Jason A. Crook
Attorney & Solicitor
Theodore H. Frank
Attorney
Alan Gura
Attorney
Al Latham
Former Staff Director, United States Commission on Civil Rights
Prof. Daniel A. Lyons
Boston College Law School
Prof. Michael J. Zydney Mannheimer
Salmon P. Chase College of Law, Northern Kentucky University
Prof. Irina D. Manta
Maurice A. Deane School of Law, Hofstra University
John D.L. McBride
Attorney
Harry Niska
Attorney
Matthew R. Romney
Attorney
Prof. Andrew C. Spiropoulos
Oklahoma City University School of Law
Jonathan Urick
Former law clerk to Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas
Steven R. Valentine
Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice
Pejman Yousefzadeh
Attorney
Jason D. Besler
Attorney
Prof. James Huffman
Lewis & Clark Law School
Prof. Bradley P. Jacob
Regent University School of Law
Brent A. Nyberg
Attorney
Christopher J. Paolella
Attorney
Prof. Michael M. Uhlmann
Claremont Graduate University
Prof. Micah J. Watson
Calvin College
Prof. Ryan Williams
Boston College Law School
Marnie J. Zak
Attorney
(Institutional affiliations are for identification purposes only; this statement does not represent the views of these or any other institutions. For further information or to be added as a signatory, please contact originalistsagainsttrump@gmail.com .)
We, the undersigned lawyers and scholars, are committed to the original meaning of the Constitution of the United States. We write to oppose the election of Donald Trump.
Our Constitution vests in a single person the executive power of the United States. In light of his character, judgment, and temperament, we would not vest that power in Donald Trump.
Many Americans still support Trump in the belief that he will protect the Constitution. We understand that belief, but we do not share it. Trumps long record of statements and conduct, in his campaign and in his business career, have shown him indifferent or hostile to the Constitutions basic featuresincluding a government of limited powers, an independent judiciary, religious liberty, freedom of speech, and due process of law.
The President must take care that the laws be faithfully executed; he admires dictators as above the law.
The President must serve as Commander in Chief, enforcing rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces; he praises armed repression and makes light of the laws of war.
The President must hold a public trust on behalf of all Americans; he courts those who would deny to others the equal protection of the laws.
The President must preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution; he has treated the legal system as a tool for arbitrary and discriminatory ends, especially against those who criticize him or his policies.
We also understand the argument that Trump will nominate qualified judicial candidates who will themselves be committed to the Constitution and the rule of law.
Notwithstanding those he has already named, we do not trust him to do so. More importantly, we do not trust him to respect constitutional limits in the rest of his conduct in office, of which judicial nominations are only one part.
Whatever reasons there might be to support Donald Trump, the Constitution is not among them.
We are under no illusions about the choices posed by this electionor about whether Hillary Clinton, were she elected, would be any friend to originalism. Yet our countrys commitment to its Constitution is not so fragile that it can be undone by a single administration or a single court. Originalism has faced setbacks before; it has recovered. Whoever wins in November, it will do so again.
Originalism is a commitment to the Constitution, not to any one political party. And not every person who professes support for originalism is therefore prepared to be President. We happen to see Trump as uniquely unsuited to the office, and we will not be voting for him.
We urge all like-minded Americans to vote their consciences in November. And we call on them, through their voices and their ballots, to deny the executive power of the United States to a man as unfit to wield it as Donald Trump.
Signatures
Prof. Jonathan H. Adler
Case Western Reserve University School of Law
Prof. William Baude
University of Chicago Law School
Prof. Josh Blackman
Houston College of Law
Prof. Steven G. Calabresi
Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law
Oren Cass
Domestic Policy Director, Romney-Ryan 2012
Prof. Bernard J. Dobski
Assumption College
Prof. Richard A. Epstein
New York University School of Law
Hoover Institution
University of Chicago Law School
Prof. Christopher Green
University of Mississippi School of Law
Josh Hammer
Attorney
Jameson Jones
Attorney
Prof. Richard Kay
University of Connecticut School of Law
Prof. Benjamin Kleinerman
James Madison College, Michigan State University
Prof. Stephen F. Knott
Author of Washington and Hamilton: The Alliance That Forged America
Yuval Levin
The Ethics and Public Policy Center
Prof. Nathan B. Oman
William & Mary Law School
Prof. Michael Stokes Paulsen
University of St. Thomas School of Law
Prof. David G. Post
Temple University Law School (ret.)
Prof. Jeremy A. Rabkin
Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
Prof. Stephen E. Sachs
Duke University School of Law
Kristen Silverberg
Former U.S. Ambassador to the European Union
Prof. Steven D. Smith
University of San Diego School of Law
Prof. Stephen F. Smith
Notre Dame Law School
Prof. Ilya Somin
Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
Prof. Kevin C. Walsh
University of Richmond School of Law
Adam White
Hoover Institution
Prof. Greg Weiner
Assumption College
Prof. Keith E. Whittington
Princeton University
George F. Will
Columnist
Prof. Michael P. Zuckert
University of Notre Dame
Prof. Eric R. Claeys
Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
Adam Conrad
Attorney
Jason A. Crook
Attorney & Solicitor
Theodore H. Frank
Attorney
Alan Gura
Attorney
Al Latham
Former Staff Director, United States Commission on Civil Rights
Prof. Daniel A. Lyons
Boston College Law School
Prof. Michael J. Zydney Mannheimer
Salmon P. Chase College of Law, Northern Kentucky University
Prof. Irina D. Manta
Maurice A. Deane School of Law, Hofstra University
John D.L. McBride
Attorney
Harry Niska
Attorney
Matthew R. Romney
Attorney
Prof. Andrew C. Spiropoulos
Oklahoma City University School of Law
Jonathan Urick
Former law clerk to Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas
Steven R. Valentine
Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice
Pejman Yousefzadeh
Attorney
Jason D. Besler
Attorney
Prof. James Huffman
Lewis & Clark Law School
Prof. Bradley P. Jacob
Regent University School of Law
Brent A. Nyberg
Attorney
Christopher J. Paolella
Attorney
Prof. Michael M. Uhlmann
Claremont Graduate University
Prof. Micah J. Watson
Calvin College
Prof. Ryan Williams
Boston College Law School
Marnie J. Zak
Attorney
(Institutional affiliations are for identification purposes only; this statement does not represent the views of these or any other institutions. For further information or to be added as a signatory, please contact originalistsagainsttrump@gmail.com .)
https://originalistsagainsttrump.wordpress.com/
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 1106 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (8)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Stopping Clinton from appointing Scalia’s replacement is no longer a good enough reason to support.. (Original Post)
DonViejo
Oct 2016
OP
pangaia
(24,324 posts)1. "For many conservative intellectuals,....."
I didn't know there was one.
Isn't that an oxymoron.
or a non-sequitor...
Cha
(297,241 posts)2. Yeah, I agree.. trump's danger outweighs any
worries about the SCOTUS.
Great! Let's hear for the Originalists!
AmericanActivist
(1,019 posts)3. Excellent concept, country and constitution before party...
every thinking American gets this notion.
StevieM
(10,500 posts)4. I doubt that Clinton will get to appoint his replacement. Once she wins the GOP senators will have
a change of heart and confirm Merrick Garland.
They won't miss their chance to confirm a man who is 65 rather than have Hillary appoint someone who is about 50.