Inside the Libertarian Movement to Take Over the Legal System (w/ Brian Beutler)

New Republic Senior Editor Brian Beutler explains the new split inside the conservative legal movement. What is the Federalist Society and what does it do. Why conservative judicial activists are moving even further away from “restraint”. Randy Barnett and the Libertarian faction of the Federalist Society. How a little known legal case called Lochner is being used to undermine the New Deal. Why the Right is now the faction of radical Court activism. The Republican internal debate about John Roberts. And what’s next for the Republican leadership?

and

[Inannalu]

Non-aggression without non-exploitation is insufficient of civility.
I don't think EITHER principle can be satisfied without adequate governmental oversight and regulation (and I think many libertarians don't give a rat's ass about the latter of those two).

[NeoRipshaft]

? With all due respect to the guest - he doesn't seem like a lawyer or have consulted properly with some prior to this interview. "Judicial Activism" is a well defined concept in non-extremist legal circles, it's defined as departing from precedent flippantly - it's an extreme violation of the broadly accepted legal philosophy of _stare decisis._
Scalia most notably was effective in promoting the idea that "Judicial Activism" was synonymous with "court rulings that conservatives do not like".


Also I'm disappointed that you didn't make it more clear that "showing restraint" is no different than "states rights" in terms of euphemistic use. The judicial system is *_supposed_* to butt heads with the legislative branch... that's why there's an independent judicial branch.


edit: Also the Heritage Foundation and Federalist Society are controlled by christian right interests, not libertarian...
Obviously you can put lipstick on any fascist and call it a libertarian - but labels matter.

[somebody]

Libertarians are Liberals in training and development who don't have quite enough info yet...

[NeoRipshaft]

Oh wow I didn't know you had something one this... though I think you need to talk to Andrew Seidel, the constitutional lawyer from the FFRF, or/and P. Andrew Torrez (prodigious legal mind and vocal lawyer dog)

[individualfilmco]

Dug gets paid for being on these comment threads. Please don't feed the troll.

[orioguy]

so basically, you can help weave and navigate the legal web. accepting and rejecting the established appropriate and inappropriate. furthering the trajectory towards the glorious prospective territory of more legal webbing. or you can be an annoying ignorant fly-human, running on instinct. presuming common sense and decency as simple universals. catching a major buzzkillers influenced head-ache and pondering the ripples of your demise, as your feed the incredible mass of nightmarish spider-people.