"Litmus Tests for Federal Judicial Appointments"
About 50 students munched on pizza while learning from a debate on
whether litmus tests for federal judicial nominees are in line with
or in opposition to our Constitutional government of limited and separate powers.
The debate was quite lively and exposed students to some of the diversity of
of the Federalist Society as a conservative (Prof. Michael Stokes Paulsen of U-MN) argued FOR
litmus tests, while a libertarian (Dr. Roger Pilon of the Cato Institute) argued AGAINST them.

Paulsen and Pilon debate
Dr. Roger Pilon
Prof. Michael Stokes Paulsen
Officers and Debaters- Rebecka Vanderwerf, Trevor Copeland, Roger Pilon, Michael Stokes Paulsen, Anthony Sanders/

Legal Disclaimers and other required information:
"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."
"The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity educator and employer."

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.

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.