Conservative Lawyers Conference: a Job Fair for the Trump Administration?

At the Federalist Society’s annual convention, several potential Supreme Court justices and lots of job seekers.

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito addressing the Federalist Society's 2016 national convention in Washington DC.AP Photo/Cliff Owen

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Perhaps the clearest manifestation of the dissipation of conservative antipathy toward Donald Trump now that he’s been elected president could be found this week in the halls of the tony Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC.

There, the Federalist Society, a prominent conservative legal organization, held its national convention. The organization had been lukewarm if not outright hostile to Trump during the campaign. But this week, it was already showing signs that a normalization of his politics is well underway, as conservative attorneys flocked to the event, some in the hopes of making the right connections to land a plum job in the new administration.

This year’s legal convention was dedicated to the memory of the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in February. The subject matter was already some what somber, but the conference schedule also seemed to reflect a coming gloom about the future of the conservative Supreme Court, having been drawn up long before Election Day, when a Hillary Clinton victory still seemed virtually inevitable. Many in the organization had opposed Trump, including the group’s co-founder, Steven Calabresi, one of a number of prominent legal scholars who signed on to a letter October from “Originalists Against Trump.” They wrote:

Many Americans still support Trump in the belief that he will protect the Constitution. We understand that belief, but we do not share it. Trump’s long record of statements and conduct, in his campaign and in his business career, have shown him indifferent or hostile to the Constitution’s basic features—including a government of limited powers, an independent judiciary, religious liberty, freedom of speech, and due process of law.

But when the conference opened Thursday morning with a speech from Justice Samuel Alito, the conservative justice spoke to a packed house. Registration for the event, according to organizers, soared immensely after the election, and it was reflected in the endless lunch lines. Hans von Spakovsky, a member of the Federal Election Commission under President George W. Bush and a regular at Federalist Society events, told me when I noted the uptick in attendance that I had made a mistake. “You are under the impression that you are attending the 2016 Federalist Society national lawyers convention,” he deadpanned. “This is the 2016 Trump administration job fair.” Von Spakovsky said he had not been contacted by anyone from the Trump team looking for a new FEC chair, but Trump probably owes him a word of thanks: He was one of the architects of the voter suppression campaign that began in the Bush administration and ultimately made it harder to vote in the recent election in some places and which some critics blame for Trump’s victory.

Rumors were flying that Calabresi was in New York this week to consult with the Trump team on Supreme Court nominations, and there was talk of a Trump Tower sighting of Leo Leonard, the Federalist Society’s executive vice president. The rumors couldn’t be confirmed, but there was a clear sense at the conference that whatever happened before the election would be put in the past, and that the group was eager to have a role in the new Republican administration.

Also on hand for the event was another group that generated intense speculation: people on Trump’s shortlist for the Supreme Court. Among them was Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Willett, an acerbic conservative who’s mocked Trump on Twitter but who nonetheless made his shortlist. I asked a bow-tied Willett whether he’d heard from Trump since the election. “I think I’ll exercise some judicial discretion and make a graceful exit,” he demurred, walking away to make a call.

Michigan Supreme Court Justice Joan Larsen, 47, was more forthcoming. On the shortlist even though her judicial experience encompasses but a single year in her current role, she said that she had not heard from the Trump team. Did she want a promotion to the high court? “I’m just a week out from having won my retention election,” she said diplomatically. “I’m really just focused on the next two years.”

Meanwhile, if things go well for the lawyers at the convention, perhaps they’ll be holding their 2017 event at the Trump International.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate