Welcome to our homepage!

If you would like to know more about the law students, professors, and attorneys who make up the National Federalist Society, along with what our membership is currently saying and doing, please visit the website of our national parent organization:
The Federalist Society for Law & Public Policy Studies - www.fed-soc.org

The Federalist Society at the University of Minnesota's Law School is a group of students dedicated to studying and debating principles of law in an open forum. We believe that this open exchange of ideas is the best method for demonstrating the superiority and correctness of right-thinking ideas in clear contrast with flawed and mistaken ideologies that should be condemned to the dust-bin of history. This web-site is designed as a resource for members of the U-MN Federalist Society, along with any other interested parties. (It is simple by intent, and is a work in progress.)

---

The series of statements displayed below offers a brief description of what our organization is about:
(It is adapted from a statement that appears on our national organization's web-site. The views expressed herein represent solely the views of the page author, and have not been reviewed or approved by the National Offices of the Federalist Society or the University of Minnesota.)

• We are an expressly non-partisan group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. Our organization is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is (according to the will of the people as expressed through their elected representatives and Constitutional government) and not what it should be in the estimation of individual jurists.
• Law schools and the legal profession are currently strongly dominated by a form of orthodox liberal ideology which advocates a centrally controlled society (where individual rights are given precedence over individual responsibilities in a manner that is disastrously imbalanced). While some members of the academic community have dissented from these views, by and large they are taught simultaneously with (and indeed as if they were) the law, with little unsolicited recognition or accord given to opposing views. We desire to provide the opportunity for greater intellectual diversity at all levels of the legal community such that current and future legal professionals can make fully informed decisions about general legal philosphy as well as specific legal issues.
• We seek both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through our activities. This entails reordering priorities within the legal system to place a premium on individual liberty, traditional values, and the rule of law. It also requires restoring not only recognition but also respect for the importance of these norms among lawyers, judges, and law professors.
• In working to achieve these goals, the Federalist Society has created a conservative and libertarian intellectual network that extends to all levels of the legal community. We strive to encourage debate that airs all sides of relevant legal issues -along with the social and political implications of those issues- with confidence that free and open discussion is the best way for all to make the most informed decisions. Our implicit faith in the rightness of our beliefs compels us to trust that they will not only hold up, but will thrive and flourish in the face of opposition. At the same time, we strive to be open-minded -- ready to adapt any views that lack substantive credibility, to embrace change where needed, and we encourage others to do the same... because that represents a true spirit of progressive growth.

• Photos and synopses from U-MN Chapter Events
  • Debate on Immigration Policy and Reform
  • Christina Hoff Sommers on Truth and Lies about Feminism
  • Distinguished Panel on Constitutional Law Practice
  • Debate on Litmus Tests for Judicial Nominees
  
  
• Public Interest Law Firms
  • American Center for Law and Justice
  • Center for Individual Rights
  • Institute for Justice
  • Landmark Legal Foundation
  • Mountain States Legal Foundation
  • National Legal Center for the Public Interest
  • Pacific Legal Foundation
  • Southeastern Legal Foundation
  • Washington Legal Foundation
  
  
• Some Legal Minds We Like: (there are too many to list here, but still too few in the world)
  • Judge Frank Easterbrook - Prof. of Law (U of Chicago), 7th Circuit Ct. of Appeals
  • Justice Antonin Scalia - U.S. Supreme Court Justice
  • Justice Clarence Thomas - U.S. Supreme Court Justice
  • Prof. Richard Epstein - Prof. of Law (U of Chicago)
  • Prof. Eugene Volokh - Prof. of Law (UCLA)
  
  
• News & Related Links
  • Is the ABA liberally biased with regard to Federal judicial nominees?
  • Are mainstream media outlets liberally biased? See Accuracy in Media and the Media Research Center
  • An article on law school bias by social critic Heather MacDonald
  
  

The views and opinions expressed in this page are strictly those of the page author.
The contents of this page have not been reviewed or approved by the University of Minnesota.