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


It’s Time to Attack Putin’s Soft Underbelly

Vladimir Putin was reelected president of Russia today in an event as predictable as the sun’s rising. But his biggest asset hasn’t been his iron grip on Russian politics, it’s been the fecklessness and passivity of his Western counterparts in the face of his outrageous actions. Garry Kasparov, the former ... Read More
White House

John Brennan Freaks Out on Twitter

Former CIA director John Brennan issued a stinging rebuttal to President Donald Trump's Thursday tweet celebrating the dismissal of former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe. Brennan, who led the CIA under President Barack Obama, referred to Trump as a “demagogue” and hinted that damning evidence of ... Read More


Happy Saint Patrick’s Day, everyone. Hope it has been a good one. Yesterday, I had a tale in my Impromptus column. I had been to Harvard, to conduct a couple of interviews, and I waxed nostalgic. In Widener Library, there are bag-checkers -- people checking your bags on your way out. Ages ago, there was this ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Hillary’s Other America

I am still chuckling at Hillary Clinton’s speech in India. Among the things she said: If you look at the map of the United States, there is all that red in the middle, places where Trump won. What that map doesn’t show you is that I won the places that own two thirds of America’s Gross Domestic product. ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Samantha Power Regrets

‘I’ve had a lot of bad ideas in my life,” former U.N. ambassador Samantha Power tells Politico. “Though none as immortalized as that one.” Wow. It’s a major concession. And what might “that one” be? Not standing idly by in the White House while Iranians protested a fixed election in 2009, then ... Read More