Defunct Newspapers Journals TV channels Websites Other Congressional caucuses Economics Gun rights Identity politics Nativist Religion Watchdog groups Youth/student groups Miscellaneous Other The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies (FedSoc) is an American conservative and libertarian legal organization that advocates for a textualist and originalist interpretation of the U.S.

The organization's stated objectives are "checking federal power, protecting individual liberty and interpreting the Constitution according to its original meaning",[1] and it plays a central role in networking and mentoring young conservative lawyers.

[5] According to Amanda Hollis-Brusky, the Federalist Society "has evolved into the de facto gatekeeper for right-of-center lawyers aspiring to government jobs and federal judgeships under Republican presidents.

The symposium, which was attended by 200 people, was organized by Steven G. Calabresi, Lee Liberman Otis, and David M. McIntosh; it included speakers such as Antonin Scalia, Robert Bork, and Theodore Olson.

[13] In 2018, Politico Magazine wrote that "it is no exaggeration to suggest that it was perhaps the most effective student conference ever—a blueprint, in retrospect, for how to marry youthful enthusiasm with intellectual oomph to achieve far-reaching results.

"[2] The society looks to Federalist Paper Number 78 for an articulation of the virtue of judicial restraint, as written by Alexander Hamilton: "It can be of no weight to say that the courts, on the pretense of a repugnancy, may substitute their own pleasure to the constitutional intentions of the legislature ...

Commissioner Paul S. Atkins of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission considered society members "the heirs of James Madison's legacy" in a speech he gave in January 2008 to its lawyers chapter in Dallas, Texas.

[17][18] Speakers have included former ACLU head Nadine Strossen, business executive and 2016 Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina, former BB&T chairman John Allison, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, U.S.

"[1] David Montgomery, writing in The Washington Post Magazine, said that each individual member of the group is "akin to an excited synapse in a sprawling hive mind with no one actually in charge."

"[1] Steven Teles, a professor of political science at Johns Hopkins University and the author of The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law, wrote that the Federalist Society's influence on the judicial selection process may not be the group's most important impact.

[1] Amanda Hollis-Brusky, political science associate professor at Pomona College, and Calvin TerBeek, Ph.D. candidate in political science at the University of Chicago, dispute that the Federalist Society is non-partisan, pointing to documents written by the Federalist Society to donors in 1984 where the organization states that one of its missions is pushing conservative positions.

[22] In rebuttal to Hollis-Brusky and TerBeek, former Solicitor General Ted Olson also wrote in Politico Magazine pointing out that in 37 years of its existence never "has the Federalist Society filed a lawsuit or brief in any litigation, and never once during that period has it passed any resolution advocating for or against any legal issue.

[26] The Federalist Society has a Regulatory Transparency Project (RTP), whose goal, according to National Review, is to "foster a nationwide conversation about areas where the costs of regulation exceed any benefits.

[28][29][30] The Federalist Society's 2024 annual gala, which took place shortly after Donald Trump's election to a second presidential term, featured a conversation between Neil Gorsuch and Stephen Breyer.

Rather, society events provide the proving ground where they hone their arguments, seize a chance to shine and come to the attention of mentors higher up in the political-legal hierarchy.

"[1] A 2008 study found that Federalist Society members appointed by Republican administrations to the U.S. Courts of Appeals had more conservative voting records than non-members.

He told The Washington Post Magazine, "You're practicing originalism appropriately when you're doing so without looking behind the curtain and trying to predetermine results" and that "There are liberals who work really hard at trying to develop a neutral, originalist approach to interpretation...The fact that people may come out differently occasionally—that's okay.

"[1] Increasingly, according to the magazine, "A number of liberal scholars have applied themselves to the task of showing how, in fact, originalist approaches can yield progressive results.

[5]: 82–87 The ideas of the Federalist Society were "at the intellectual heart" of National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, which challenged the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), with members of the group playing a "mostly behind-the-scenes part in NFIB—and in many of the most significant conservative legal victories of the last 30 years.

"[5]: 135 Libertarian law professor Randy Barnett attended his first Federalist Society event in 1986 and found the group "open to testing a diversity of ideas".

He became a "leading voice of the growing libertarian wing of the Federalist Society, and he became one of the architects of constitutional claims at the core of lawsuits against the health-care plan.

The memorandum "became a source of talking points during congressional debate and laid the framework for subsequent court challenges; Barnett represented one of the plaintiffs.

"[42] The Federalist Society was influential in the Trump administration, hand-selecting Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch and recruiting a slate of conservative judges to fill vacancies throughout the federal judiciary.

[45][46] Federalist Society members generally chose not to criticize Trump, and Politico described the Federalist Society membership as "elite, conservative lawyers who have generally chosen to give Trump a pass on his breaches of long-cherished legal norms and traditions in exchange for the gift of Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch.

"[48][49] Specific members mentioned for possible removal included John Eastman, chair of the Federalist Society's federalism and separation of powers practice group, who made claims about election fraud at a Trump rally on January 6, 2021—the day of the Capitol attack.