Bench Memos

Law & the Courts

Update on Andy Schlafly’s Smear Campaign—Part 2

Some more observations (numbered serially from my Part 1 post):

4. Let me now address the so-called response from Andy Schlafly that I’ve just learned of.

a. Schlafly does not actually address (must less engage) any of my criticisms of his smears. Nor does he even link to them. His evident intention is to keep in the dark those who have made the error of trusting him.

b. Schlafly asserts that “Whalen’s [sic] criticisms disparage the very concept of appointing a ‘really pro-life’ justice to the Supreme Court, so he is a weak candidate to talk about satisfying [Trump’s] pledge.” I’ve already answered this confused charge of his, so I’ll just repeat what I said (in point 5 of this post):

I have explained why Schlafly’s use of the term “pro-life,” when applied to judges, is badly confused and is something that Justice Scalia (whom he says he wants to have Trump “replace … with someone as close to his views as possible”) rejected. I have objected that Schlafly appears to want judges to indulge pro-life values to misread the law in order to reach pro-life results. 

In short, I don’t think that being “really pro-life” involves lying about what a legal text means. And I also don’t think that it involves baseless smears.

c. Schlafly maligns Leonard Leo by repeating a characterization of remarks by Leo that I have shown to be mistaken. Once again, Schlafly isn’t decent enough even to mention that Leo has disputed the characterization, much less to link to my post.

5. I have no interest in embarrassing the small handful of folks who are current signatories to Schlafly’s letter. Perhaps there is some reason that they have mistakenly placed their trust in Schlafly and have failed to exercise due diligence. If you happen to know any of them, please send them my links, as Schlafly is obviously intent on not doing so.

Among the countless pro-life organizations that have not signed on to Schlafly’s letter are National Right to Life, Americans United for Life, Susan B. Anthony List, Family Research Council, Faith and Freedom Coalition, Alliance Defending Freedom, and American Center for Law and Justice. But I’d bet that Schlafly would charge that they’re not really pro-life.

Most Popular

Film & TV

Netflix Debuts Its Obama Manifesto

This week’s widespread media blitz heralding Netflix’s broadcast of its first Obama-endorsed presentation, American Factory, was more than synchronicity. It felt as though U.S. publicists and journalists collectively exhaled their relief at finally regaining the bully pulpit. Reviews of American Factory, a ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Capital versus Tucker Carlson

Advertisers do not advertise on Tucker Carlson’s show to endorse the views of Tucker Carlson. They advertise on his show for the same reason they advertise elsewhere: a captive audience — in Tucker’s case, the second-largest one in cable news — might spare thirty seconds of attention that will, they hope, ... Read More
Natural Law

Are Your Sexual Preferences Transphobic?

Last year, a study exploring “transgender exclusion from the world of dating” was published in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. Of nearly 1,000 participants, the overwhelming majority, 87.5 percent, irrespective of their sexual preference, said they would not consider dating a trans person, ... Read More