On Dark Money and the Right's Judicial 'Revival'
Leonard Leo sits at the center of an almost $250 million network of dark money groups working to fill our courts with men and women (but mostly men) who will roll back the clock on our laws and our democracy.
May 31, 2019 at 01:33 PM
5 minute read
The man leading President Donald Trump's revamp of our nation's judiciary once boasted to a private gathering of wealthy donors that America is on the brink of a right-wing “revival” of the Constitution. That man is Leonard Leo. And he sits at the center of an almost $250 million network of dark money groups working to fill our courts with men and women (but mostly men) who will roll back the clock on our laws and our democracy all the way to the robber baron era.
This movement, which Leo now has termed the resurrection of the “structural Constitution,” has a long history and deep roots. But you can really see it emerging in the Reagan years, following the rejection of the ultra-conservative Robert Bork's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court. And you can see it in the confirmation hearings for Justice Clarence Thomas when then-Sen. Joe Biden, chairman of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, said Thomas was unfit for a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court because he embraced this extreme agenda.
That was before Anita Hill's eyewitness testimony about her sexual harassment by Thomas dominated the headlines. Thomas denied both Hill's charges and Biden's.
Justice Thomas' wife, Ginni Thomas, recently gave Leo an award she created to honor her allies on the right. She praised Leo for “single-handedly changing the face of the judiciary under the auspices of the Federalist Society,” noting that “he has many hats; that's not even all he does.”
That's true. He not only picked the list of judges Trump chooses from, but he also helps orchestrate millions of dollars to get them confirmed to further his extreme agenda.
That agenda includes not just overruling Roe v. Wade, but nearly a century of Supreme Court decisions upholding the hard-won progress of the New Deal, our civil rights struggles, and Great Society protections up to the present day. His agenda is to destroy what the right dubs “the administrative state” by judicial fiat.
Every issue progressives care about is on Leo's judicial chopping block. The judges and justices he is installing have been chosen to help strike down not just new policies like the Green New Deal and Medicare for All, but clean air and water regulations and consumer protections passed by overwhelming congressional majorities decades ago. They will also escalate the existing right-wing assault on workers' rights and kneecap agencies that billionaires like Charles Koch have long wanted eliminated, including the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Department of Education.
And these radicals in robes will wage a culture war at a pitch yet unseen, stripping people of color and LGBTQ people of basic human rights, all on the basis of a warped notion of “free speech” and “religious freedom” that the Constitution's framers could never have intended.
And it has already begun. We can see it in the discredited Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling that unleashed hundreds of millions in spending on elections by billionaires and powerful special interest groups. Since that ruling, dark money without limits and from undisclosed sources has dwarfed the spending of candidates and political parties. The court's recent gutting of the Voting Rights Act is another sign.
Indeed, Leo recently told far-right donors they have to treat judicial nominations as “political campaigns,” saying more money is needed to “defend” his nominees and their rulings “in unprecedented ways.”
While Leo knows exactly who is bankrolling his efforts to capture our courts, the American people do not.
It's the $250 million question that everyone should be asking. Who is funding this effort to dramatically rewrite our Constitution and remake our country without a debate or our consent?
This is a real constitutional crisis. It goes to the heart of the legitimacy of the courts. And “We the People” deserve the truth.
Caroline Fredrickson is the president of the American Constitution Society and author of “Under the Bus: How Working Women Are Being Run Over” and the forthcoming “The Democracy Fix: How to Win the Fight for Fair Rules, Fair Courts, and Fair Elections.” She can be reached on Twitter @crfredrickson.
Lisa Graves is the co-founder of Documented Investigations and previously served as chief counsel for nominations for the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, deputy assistant attorney general at the U.S. Department of Justice (on nominations and more), and in other posts. She is also a researcher for ACS. She can be reached on Twitter @thelisagraves.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLingering Questions at Supreme Court About Climate Change Litigation Need Resolution
6 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250