Federalist Society Hosts White Nationalist

The Federalist Society is seen as must-join organization for the conservative ranks of the legal profession.  In many ways membership functions as a litmus test for a very specific flavor of constitutional interpretation that conservatives believe demonstrates true fidelity to our democratic principles.

So why then would the Dallas chapter of The Federalist Society host prominent white nationalist Peter Brimelow on a panel debating birthright citizenship?

Brimelow is known as an outspoken and hostile critic of immigration who saves his most aggressive attacks for immigrants of color.  In his 1995 book Alien nation he argued that America is a historically white-dominated nation and it should stay that way.  He’s called for all white Americans to demand a change to immigration quotas that would favor white immigrants and believes the role of race in American society is “elemental, absolute, fundamental.”

Brimelow is also on record as lamenting the GOP’s lack of open support of “pro white” views and is a strong supporter of the racist Council of Conservative Citizens.

While Brimelow may think that the GOP no longer openly supports “pro white” views, his presence on the Dallas panel alongside former U.S. Supreme Court clerks, law professors and solicitor generals suggests otherwise.  And this is a recurring theme with Republicans, and a dangerous one. 

It’s impossible to argue straight-faced that the GOP doesn’t at a minimum flirt with white nationalism.  Given the current legislative proposals at the state and federal level, including birther inspired electoral requirements, racial profiling voting and immigration measures all the way to secessionist measures this flirtation is turning into a full-on open relationship.

photo courtesy of steakpinball via Flickr


Barbara Erdman
Barbara Erdman5 years ago

thanx for article

Robert Shelby
Robert Shelby5 years ago

Conservatives cozy up to anyone they think they can suck a vote from!

Martha Eberle
Martha Eberle5 years ago

Perhaps the agenda of the Federalist Society is not what you think it is. Perhaps they have a hidden agenda. Perhaps people should pay attention to actions, and not just words.

Tana Williams
Tana Williams5 years ago

Deborah, the difference is the Tea Party hides it better. That's why the TP sprang into being, as Athena came from Zeus head, complete. The Racist Koch brothers were ready, just in case that n..... got elected. If it was actually political, they would have been there before the 2008 election instead of after. And I'm sure part of the brothers' concerns were how Obama's policies might affect them and their billionaire buddies too.

Doug D.
Doug D.5 years ago

Rascist = Ignorance. Why would anyone want to listen to a guy that is going to try to make you more dumb? But I guess the bigots who want to listen to this guy already are lacking something upstairs....

Ann P.
A P.5 years ago

They really do want to set the clock back in everything, race, gender... Has anyone watched some of the Heritage Foundation presentations on C-SPAN. These people really view the past with rose color glasses. The inequities of the past favored them, so of course fairness would be seen as a threat.

But I agree with William Y. do not trade one form of bigotry for another, many white men and women fought for equality risking their own jobs, businesses, families and sometimes lives. To disparage all of any race is as ugly and unjust in either direction. Now when someone freely joins a group - then it is fair to assume they espouse the values of that group.

Deborah L.
Deborah Lashever5 years ago

Alright, I'm confused. And I am deadly serious about this. I am asking a real question and not trying to inflame. Does anyone have a serious answer?

Exactly what is the difference between the Tea Party and Neo-Nazis, White Supremacists or the like? Really. Truly. Aren't they saying the same thing? Each point seems the exact same. If anyone can tell me a real difference I'd truly like to hear you out.

Deborah L.
Deborah Lashever5 years ago

I just keep thinking how sad it is that the people who say they worship The Prince of Peace and the one who admonished His followers to "LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF" are the ones who are so full of hate and deep selfishness that they would kill, or at least disenfranchise, everyone that doesn't agree with, or look like them. I hope they really do meet their Lord Jesus in the next world. I think He has some things to talk with them about.......

Stephen Amsel
Past Member 5 years ago

First, if the Federalist Society is a must-join for conservative legal professionals, the U.S. is in a whole lot of trouble: I understand it has about 30,000 members, out of over a million members of the American Bar Association. If over 97% of the legal profession in the U.S. is of the same political leaning, the Federalist Society's concern regarding the writing of law from the bench is more than warranted. This could be a very, very serious problem because if liberal judges decide to take lawmaking into their own hands, appeals would most likely go to similar-minded judges.

Second, here is Brimlow's response to this criticism:
He opposes affirmative action and says it is exacerbated not only by immigration of people who become subject to such affirmative action, but by application of affirmative action to immigration. Essentially, people are still being selected on the basis of ethnicity, but now the system simply disfavors whites rather than favor them. The problem the 1965 immigration-act, which his book was about, was supposed to fix is still there.

Another important point here is that he seems to be culturist, not racist. This looks like semantics, but while whites are not intrinsically better or worse than anyone, Western culture is favorable to others. Who wants to incorporate, for example, African or Middle Eastern sexism into U.S. culture? Would you prefer South American machismo?

Roger Garin-michaud

another fruit basket !