DOCSLIB.ORG

Conquering the Courts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Conquering the Courts 1 Conquering the Courts The Religious Right’s Fight to Rig the Rules and Undermine Judicial Independence by Arn Pearson ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS David Armiak, Max Abbott, and Cynthia Moothart contributed to this report. This report was made possible by funding from the Piper Fund, an initiative of the Proteus Fund. The Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) is a nationally recognized watchdog that leads in-depth, award-winning investigations into the hidden avenues of influence that undermine our democracy, environment, and economic prosperity. 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary_______________________________________________ 1 Introduction______________________________________________________ 2 Stacking the Deck Against Rights____________________________________ 3 Focus on the Family and the Family Policy Alliance_____________________ 5 State Profiles_____________________________________________________ 7 Alaska_____________________________________________________ 7 Arkansas___________________________________________________ 8 Florida_____________________________________________________ 8 Iowa_______________________________________________________ 9 Kansas_____________________________________________________ 10 North Carolina_______________________________________________ 12 Tennessee__________________________________________________ 12 Wisconsin__________________________________________________ 13 Conclusion______________________________________________________ 15 Appendix A______________________________________________________ 16 End Notes_______________________________________________________ 18 3 Executive Summary The ouster of three justices from Iowa’s Ten of the biggest politically active reli- Supreme Court in 2010, as retaliation for gious right groups have a combined bud- a unanimous decision overturning the get of more than $220 million. Focus on state’s ban on same-sex marriage, sent the Family and its advocacy partner, the shock waves through courts across the Family Policy Alliance, have not received country. But it was just one battle in a as much attention as some other groups, long-term, well-funded, and highly orga- but spent $92 million in fiscal year 2016, nized crusade by Christian right groups and funneled $6.9 million to a network of to undermine rights by assailing the inde- local partners in 38 states between 2012 pendence of America’s judiciary. and 2015. The religious right and its political strate- Over the past decade, the two groups gists have recognized the importance of have worked in coalition with other the courts for advancing its social agen- “values” organizations, partisan play- da and world view for decades. James ers, and corporate front groups in more Bopp, an Indiana lawyer and former Vice than a dozen states—including Alaska, Chairman of the Republican National Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, North Committee, has effectively married the Carolina, Tennessee, and Wisconsin—to interests of partisan and corporate ac- politicize state courts through legal chal- tors with conservative religious groups lenges, legislation, and election to mount a relentless attack on the spending. walls that protect judges from popular pressures—merit selection, campaign In addition to their Iowa victory, those finance laws, and judicial codes of con- coalitions have passed a 2014 ballot duct that limit what judges can say about measure abolishing Tennessee’s merit their views on legal issues. selection system; won a conservative majority on Wisconsin’s Supreme Court; However, Bopp’s 2010 U.S. Supreme and mounted a major, but unsuccessful, Court victory in Citizens United has argu- challenge against four Kansas Supreme ably done more to subject state courts Court justices in 2016 based on their to political pressures than anything else. rulings on abortion, death penalty, and That decision opened the door to unlim- school funding cases. ited political spending by corporations, including nonprofits, and outside spend- While religious right groups have not ing on judicial elections since then has been able to replicate their Iowa rout in soared. the past three election cycles, they have stepped up their challenges to judicial Religious right organizations have be- independence and are in it for the long come a major player in that mix in a haul. number of states, and have been em- boldened by the Trump administration’s recent assaults on rights and disdain for the separation of church and state. 1 Introduction In 2009, six years before the U.S. Su- in high-profile congressional, legislative, preme Court affirmed marriage equality, presidential, and gubernatorial elections, the Iowa Supreme Court unanimously the push to politicize state judicial elec- upheld a lower court ruling that denial of tions has received less attention. But the marriage licenses to same-sex couples threat is just as real. The influence of big violated the liberty and equal protection money—already pervasive in the making clauses of the state’s constitution.1 of our laws—increasingly casts a shad- ow on how laws and constitutions get The political backlash was swift and dra- interpreted. matic. A network of right-wing religious organizations poured $1 million into the The U.S. Constitution enshrined three state to oppose the 2010 retention elec- branches of government as a check and tion of three of the justices, and all three balance against tyranny, but today’s were voted off the bench, marking the well-financed crusade against judicial first time in state history that even one independence threatens to collapse the justice was ousted. separation of powers into a concentra- tion of power instead. It was not, however, a first for the nation. Social conservatives successfully ousted All courts are under attack by conserva- three California Supreme Court justices tive warriors, but since Iowa those most based on their death penalty decisions in at risk are in the states. Newly empow- 1986, and Karl Rove engineered Repub- ered by Citizens United, the same spe- lican supreme court upsets in Texas and cial interests that have flooded statewide Alabama in 1988 and 1994.2 and legislative races with dark money are bearing down on courts to eliminate But the Iowa sweep signaled a renewed the last barrier to their ideological agen- push by the religious right to impose its da. ideology and agenda on state courts in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s The stakes are high. While the U.S. ruling in Citizens United v. FEC, which Supreme Court commands most of our legitimized the intervention of corpo- attention, it hears only around 100 to rations—including nonprofits—in elec- 150 cases each session. By compari- tions. Citizen United’s legal mastermind, son, more than 100 million cases come James Bopp, orchestrated challenges to before nearly 30,000 state court judges judicial selection rules and sitting judges every year.3 And those decisions touch in Iowa, Kansas, and Alaska in 2009 and lives in intimate, deeply personal ways. 2010. While the other two efforts failed, State courts very often have the final say the Iowa upset caused a judicial earth- in determining what human rights and quake, and the religious right came away freedoms we, as a society, affirm or deny with a winning playbook it could put to under the rule of law. use across the nation to impose its ideol- ogy and social policies on state courts. While we have become accustomed to news of powerful “dark money” groups flooding the airwaves and our mailboxes 2 Stacking the Deck Against form of election for their judges, ex- posing them to the public pressures of Rights modern campaigns. Twenty-one states choose their Supreme Court justices by The organized religious right and its popular election, and another 16 have political strategists have long recognized periodic retention elections requiring a the importance of the courts for advanc- 50-percent-plus vote for justices to stay ing its social agenda and world view. in office after being appointed. Attorney James Bopp has spent a good part of the last two decades fighting to Bopp has also spearheaded a string of maximize the influence of his clients in cases challenging restrictions on judicial the halls of justice by challenging re- “speech,” and won a major victory in strictions on campaign spending, judicial White v. Republican Party of Minnesota selection laws, and ethics rules. In his in 2002, when the U.S. Supreme Court quest, Bopp has married the interests struck down that state’s bar against judi- of the Republican National Committee, cial candidates announcing their views where he served as special counsel and on legal and political issues.5 Bopp’s vice chairman, with powerful conserva- goal is to pressure judges and candi- tive clients like Focus on the Family, the dates to go on the record on hot-button National Right to Life Committee, the issues and so that religious and partisan National Organization for Marriage, and conservatives can mobilize voters to the Christian Coalition. hold them accountable to their ideologi- cal views.6 The target? Any state that has some Source: Common Cause 4 3 But Bopp’s victory in Citizens United ful new ally in the Trump administration, has arguably done more to politicize the which has launched assaults on every- judiciary than anything else. In 2010, the thing from access to contraceptives and first election after the Citizens United abortion to civil rights protections and decision, spending on retention elections marriage equality, and has challenged in just four states (Alaska,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FPC Disclosure Amicus Brief
    Nos. 19-251, 19-255 In The Supreme Court of the United States ____________ AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY FOUNDATION, Petitioner, v. XAVIER BECCERA, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of California, Respondent, — and — THOMAS MORE LAW CENTER, Petitioner, v. XAVIER BECCERA, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of California, Respondent. ____________ On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ____________ Brief of Amici Curiae 24 Family Policy Organiza- tions Supporting Petitioners ____________ Anita Y. Milanovich Counsel of Record MILANOVICH LAW, PLLC 100 E. Broadway Street The Berkeley Room Butte, Montana 59701 Ph.: 406/589-6856 Email: aymilanovich@ milanovichlaw.com September 25, 2019 QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1) Whether the exacting scrutiny this Court has long required of laws that abridge the freedoms of speech and association outside the election con- text—as called for by NAACP v. Alabama ex rel. Patterson, 357 U.S. 449 (1958), and its progeny— can be satisfied absent any showing that a blanket governmental demand for the individual identities and addresses of major donors to private nonprofit organizations is narrowly tailored to an asserted law-enforcement interest (Petitioner Americans for Prosperity Foundation). 2) Whether exacting scrutiny or strict scrutiny applies to disclosure requirements that burden nonelectoral, expressive association rights (Peti- tioner Thomas More Center). 3) Whether California’s disclosure requirement violates charities’ and their donors’ freedom of association and speech facially or as applied to the Law Center (Petitioner Thomas More Center). (i) TABLE OF CONTENTS Question Presented .................................................... i Table of Contents .....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • RIGHTS at RISK
    RIGHTS at RISK Time for Action Observatory on the Universality of Rights Trends Report 2021 RIGHTS AT RISK: TIME FOR ACTION Observatory on the Universality of Rights Trends Report 2021 Chapter 4: Anti-Rights Actors 4 www.oursplatform.org 72 RIGHTS AT RISK: TIME FOR ACTION Observatory on the Universality of Rights Trends Report 2021 Chapter 4: Anti-Rights Actors Chapter 4: CitizenGo Anti-Rights Actors – Naureen Shameem AWID Mission and History ounded in August 2013 and headquartered Fin Spain,221 CitizenGo is an anti-rights platform active in multiple regions worldwide. It describes itself as a “community of active citizens who work together, using online petitions and action alerts as a resource, to defend and promote life, family and liberty.”222 It also claims that it works to ensure respect for “human dignity and individuals’ rights.”223 United Families Ordo Iuris, International Poland Center for World St. Basil the Istoki Great Family and Endowment Congress of Charitable Fund, Russia Foundation, Human Rights Families Russia (C-Fam) The International Youth Alliance Coalition Russian Defending Orthodox Freedom Church Anti-Rights (ADF) Human Life Actors Across International Heritage Foundation, USA FamilyPolicy, Russia the Globe Group of Friends of the and their vast web Family of connections Organization Family Watch of Islamic International Cooperation Anti-rights actors engage in tactical (OIC) alliance building across lines of nationality, religion, and issue, creating a transnational network of state and non-state actors undermining rights related to gender and sexuality. This El Yunque, Mexico visual represents only a small portion Vox party, The Vatican World Youth Spain of the global anti-rights lobby.
    [Show full text]
  • Amicus Briefs in This Case
    NO. 16-111 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States MASTERPIECE CAKESHOP, LTD., ET. AL., Petitioners, v. COLORADO CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION, ET. AL., Respondents. On Writ of Certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE 33 FAMILY POLICY ORGANIZATIONS IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS DAVID FRENCH Counsel of record Senior Fellow NATIONAL REVIEW INSTITUTE 215 Lexington Avenue 11th Floor New York, New York 10016 (931) 446-7572 [email protected] Counsel for Amici Curiae i QUESTION PRESENTED Whether applying Colorado’s public- accommodation law to compel artists to create expression that violates their sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage violates the Free Speech or Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS QUESTION PRESENTED ......................................... i TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ..................................... iii INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE ............................... 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT .................................... 2 ARGUMENT .............................................................. 6 I. If Freedom of Conscience Can Survive the World’s Worst War, It Should Survive the Sexual Revolution. ............................................... 6 II. Creative Professionals and Corporations Consistently Exercise Their Rights under Barnette to Promote and Disassociate from Specific Values and Messages. .......................... 13 III. To Undermine Barnette Is To Cruelly Impoverish the Marketplace of Ideas. .............. 21 CONCLUSION ......................................................... 25 iii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases: Craig v. Masterpiece Cakeshop, Inc., 370 P.3d 272 (Colo. App. 2015) .................... 17-18 Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S. Ct. 2584 (2015) .................................. 12, 26 West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943) .................................... passim Other Authorities: Accessories: 42mm Pride Edition Woven Nylon, Apple, https://www.apple.com/ca/shop/ product/MQ4G2AM/A/42mm-pride-edition- woven-nylon (last visited Sept.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Message to the 117Th Congress: Don't Draft Our Daughters
    Special Message to the 117th Congress: Don’t Draft Our Daughters August 31, 2021 Dear Senators and Representatives, We write to you united in serious concern about the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2022 which the Senate Armed Services Committee approved on July 21. The legislation is unacceptable because it would amend the Military Selective Service Act (MSSA) to require young women to register with Selective Service for a possible future draft. Sen. Jack Reed’s deceptively simple language – reportedly to change the MSSA words “male citizens” to “all Americans” – is unnecessary, unwise, and, in our view, outrageous. Imposition of Selective Service obligations, including a possible future draft of our daughters, sisters, and nieces, would not only hurt women, it would compromise our military’s essential function during a time of catastrophic national emergency. A monumental and consequential reversal such as this should not be approved behind closed doors, and the full Senate and House should not rubber-stamp “Draft Our Daughters” language in the NDAA. The only acceptable option is to strike the Reed amendment and seriously, thoroughly, and responsibly consider what the Selective Service law really means. This is a matter of national security – not “women’s rights,” “men’s rights,” or civilian volunteer service. Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution assigns to Congress the authority to establish and support the armed forces and to ensure that they are prepared to secure our nation and defend our freedom. As the Supreme Court has recognized, the purpose of a draft is not to fill various non- combat billets, it is to quickly provide qualified replacements for combat casualties.
    [Show full text]
  • Capitol Insurrection at Center of Conservative Movement
    Capitol Insurrection At Center Of Conservative Movement: At Least 43 Governors, Senators And Members Of Congress Have Ties To Groups That Planned January 6th Rally And Riots. SUMMARY: On January 6, 2021, a rally in support of overturning the results of the 2020 presidential election “turned deadly” when thousands of people stormed the U.S. Capitol at Donald Trump’s urging. Even Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who rarely broke with Trump, has explicitly said, “the mob was fed lies. They were provoked by the President and other powerful people.” These “other powerful people” include a vast array of conservative officials and Trump allies who perpetuated false claims of fraud in the 2020 election after enjoying critical support from the groups that fueled the Capitol riot. In fact, at least 43 current Governors or elected federal office holders have direct ties to the groups that helped plan the January 6th rally, along with at least 15 members of Donald Trump’s former administration. The links that these Trump-allied officials have to these groups are: Turning Point Action, an arm of right-wing Turning Point USA, claimed to send “80+ buses full of patriots” to the rally that led to the Capitol riot, claiming the event would be one of the most “consequential” in U.S. history. • The group spent over $1.5 million supporting Trump and his Georgia senate allies who claimed the election was fraudulent and supported efforts to overturn it. • The organization hosted Trump at an event where he claimed Democrats were trying to “rig the election,” which he said would be “the most corrupt election in the history of our country.” • At a Turning Point USA event, Rep.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservative Movement
    Conservative Movement How did the conservative movement, routed in Barry Goldwater's catastrophic defeat to Lyndon Johnson in the 1964 presidential campaign, return to elect its champion Ronald Reagan just 16 years later? What at first looks like the political comeback of the century becomes, on closer examination, the product of a particular political moment that united an unstable coalition. In the liberal press, conservatives are often portrayed as a monolithic Right Wing. Close up, conservatives are as varied as their counterparts on the Left. Indeed, the circumstances of the late 1980s -- the demise of the Soviet Union, Reagan's legacy, the George H. W. Bush administration -- frayed the coalition of traditional conservatives, libertarian advocates of laissez-faire economics, and Cold War anti- communists first knitted together in the 1950s by William F. Buckley Jr. and the staff of the National Review. The Reagan coalition added to the conservative mix two rather incongruous groups: the religious right, primarily provincial white Protestant fundamentalists and evangelicals from the Sunbelt (defecting from the Democrats since the George Wallace's 1968 presidential campaign); and the neoconservatives, centered in New York and led predominantly by cosmopolitan, secular Jewish intellectuals. Goldwater's campaign in 1964 brought conservatives together for their first national electoral effort since Taft lost the Republican nomination to Eisenhower in 1952. Conservatives shared a distaste for Eisenhower's "modern Republicanism" that largely accepted the welfare state developed by Roosevelt's New Deal and Truman's Fair Deal. Undeterred by Goldwater's defeat, conservative activists regrouped and began developing institutions for the long haul.
    [Show full text]
  • Anti-Transgender Legislation
    WHAT WE ARE UP AGAINST • The Heritage Foundation • Family Policy Alliance • Alliance for Defending Freedom • American College of Pediatrics • The Eagle Forum • Family Research Council • Focus on the Family • Concerned Women for America • More https://promisetoamericaschildren.org/about-us/ GROUP OF SIX “Our organizations are strongly opposed to any legislation or regulation that would interfere with the provision of evidence- based patient care for any patient, affirming our commitment to patient safety. We recognize health as a basic human right for every person, regardless of gender identity or sexual orientation. For gender-diverse individuals, including children and adolescents, this means access to gender-affirming care that is part of comprehensive primary care.” http://www.groupof6.org/content/dam/AAFP/documents/advocacy/prevention/equality/ST-G6- FrontlinePhysiciansOpposeLegislationThatInterferesInOrPenalizesPatientCare-040221.pdf PROHIBIT GENDER AFFIRMING CARE Pending Failed Enacted AAP, AR AAP, ACLU, ACLU OF ARKANSAS | HB 1570 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-4dxbpGGPY ARKANSAS HB 1570 • Governor veto on • Prohibits gender-affirming care Monday • Prohibits pediatricians and other • Legislature overrides physicians from referring youth for veto on Tuesday gender-affirming care • The bill is now law • Classifies providing this care as unprofessional conduct • Effective the 91st day after adjournment • Prohibits any public funding for gender-affirming care • However, legislature is only expected to • Prohibits Medicaid from paying for recess on April 30, gender-affirming care not adjourn • GRAY AREA – psychiatric care – The sponsor has repeatedly stated that mental health care is allowed IN THE NEWS PROHIBIT ATHLETIC TEAM PARTICIPATION Pending Failed Enacted Enacted in 2020 Turned into a study bill Executive Order.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of the Digital Political Advertising Network
    PLATFORMS AND OUTSIDERS IN PARTY NETWORKS: THE EVOLUTION OF THE DIGITAL POLITICAL ADVERTISING NETWORK Bridget Barrett A thesis submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts at the Hussman School of Journalism and Media. Chapel Hill 2020 Approved by: Daniel Kreiss Adam Saffer Adam Sheingate © 2020 Bridget Barrett ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Bridget Barrett: Platforms and Outsiders in Party Networks: The Evolution of the Digital Political Advertising Network (Under the direction of Daniel Kreiss) Scholars seldom examine the companies that campaigns hire to run digital advertising. This thesis presents the first network analysis of relationships between federal political committees (n = 2,077) and the companies they hired for electoral digital political advertising services (n = 1,034) across 13 years (2003–2016) and three election cycles (2008, 2012, and 2016). The network expanded from 333 nodes in 2008 to 2,202 nodes in 2016. In 2012 and 2016, Facebook and Google had the highest normalized betweenness centrality (.34 and .27 in 2012 and .55 and .24 in 2016 respectively). Given their positions in the network, Facebook and Google should be considered consequential members of party networks. Of advertising agencies hired in the 2016 electoral cycle, 23% had no declared political specialization and were hired disproportionately by non-incumbents. The thesis argues their motivations may not be as well-aligned with party goals as those of established political professionals. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES .................................................................................................................... V POLITICAL CONSULTING AND PARTY NETWORKS ...............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Republican Establishment Now Seeking an Article V Constitutional Convention by Janine Hansen, Eagle Forum National Constitutional Issues Chairman
    WARNING! Republican Establishment Now Seeking an Article V Constitutional Convention By Janine Hansen, Eagle Forum National Constitutional Issues Chairman The Passage of an Article V Constitutional Convention appears to have become the objective of “The Powers that Be” in the Republican Establishment. It is being bantered about as a way to overcome the “Trump” problem. The message seems to be, Don’t worry if Trump gets elected, we will take care of everything by having a “Convention of States.” Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and John Kasich have all recently stated publicly that they will now make the passage of an Article V so-called “Convention of States” their primary goal. Premier Neo Con and Establishment Republican William Kristol, Editor of the Weekly Standard, used his publication to promote Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s plan for an Article V Convention. Kristol is an important voice of the pro- internationalist/anti-American Sovereignty arm of the Republican Establishment. Also prominent conservative Republicans are promoting an Article V Constitutional Convention. http://www.weeklystandard.com/a-new- constitutional-convention/article/2000805 Texas Governor Greg Abbott has published his list of nine amendments. He made passage of a so-called “convention of states” a top priority at the Texas Republican State Convention last weekend. The Convention passed contradictory platform planks on Article V purposefully confusing the issue. This is especially true when one considers the “Convention of States” organization proposes unlimited structural changes which opens all the Articles of the Constitution to amendment through an Article V Constitutional Convention. There is no difference between an Article V Constitutional Convention and their so-called “convention of states.” The terminology of “convention of states” is found nowhere in Article V in the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Two Women's Movements
    The Two Women’s Movements Feminism has been on the march since the 1970s, but so has the conservative backlash. By Kim Phillips-Fein June 1, 2017 Phyllis Schlafly at a rally at the Illinois State Capitol in 1977. (AP) Not even death could stop Phyllis Schlafly. Her final broadside, The Conservative Case for Trump, was released the day after she died at the age of 92 last September. It was a fitting bookend to her first, A Choice Not an Echo, her self-published endorsement of Barry Goldwater for president in 1964. Unlike many other Christian conservatives who backed Texas Senator Ted Cruz in the GOP’s 2016 primaries, Schlafly supported Trump from the outset. Early in the year, she gave an hour-long interview to Breitbart News, making the case that Trump represented the only chance to overturn the “kingmakers” (her word for the Republican establishment). Like Trump, Schlafly’s politics were often focused on a muscular concept of national security. She wanted to see a “fence” protecting the country’s southern border, and she argued that Democrats were recruiting “illegals” in order to bolster their electoral chances. Despite his three marriages, she saw Trump as an “old-fashioned” man whose priorities were hard work and family. After Schlafly died, Trump returned the love. He gave a eulogy at her funeral in the Cathedral Basilica of St. Louis, raising a finger to deliver a promise: “We will never, ever let you down.” Schlafly emerged on the national scene in the early 1970s, when she led the campaign against the Equal Rights Amendment through her Eagle Forum.
    [Show full text]
  • The Long New Right and the World It Made Daniel Schlozman Johns
    The Long New Right and the World It Made Daniel Schlozman Johns Hopkins University [email protected] Sam Rosenfeld Colgate University [email protected] Version of January 2019. Paper prepared for the American Political Science Association meetings. Boston, Massachusetts, August 31, 2018. We thank Dimitrios Halikias, Katy Li, and Noah Nardone for research assistance. Richard Richards, chairman of the Republican National Committee, sat, alone, at a table near the podium. It was a testy breakfast at the Capitol Hill Club on May 19, 1981. Avoiding Richards were a who’s who from the independent groups of the emergent New Right: Terry Dolan of the National Conservative Political Action Committee, Paul Weyrich of the Committee for the Survival of a Free Congress, the direct-mail impresario Richard Viguerie, Phyllis Schlafly of Eagle Forum and STOP ERA, Reed Larson of the National Right to Work Committee, Ed McAteer of Religious Roundtable, Tom Ellis of Jesse Helms’s Congressional Club, and the billionaire oilman and John Birch Society member Bunker Hunt. Richards, a conservative but tradition-minded political operative from Utah, had complained about the independent groups making mischieF where they were not wanted and usurping the traditional roles of the political party. They were, he told the New Rightists, like “loose cannonballs on the deck of a ship.” Nonsense, responded John Lofton, editor of the Viguerie-owned Conservative Digest. If he attacked those fighting hardest for Ronald Reagan and his tax cuts, it was Richards himself who was the loose cannonball.1 The episode itself soon blew over; no formal party leader would follow in Richards’s footsteps in taking independent groups to task.
    [Show full text]
  • April 3, 2019 Dear Members of the News
    April 3, 2019 Dear Members of the News Media: In September 2017, a group similar to the one signing below wrote a public letter to warn the news media about the untrustworthy and corrupt nature of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). We suggested then that you refrain from using the SPLC as a source.1 Some news organizations and individuals became more circumspect about the SPLC, but, unfortunately, some did not. That said, 2017 and 2018 produced several publications marking the beginning of a much-needed reassessment of the SPLC’s self- appointed standing as America’s arbiter of “hate.”2 Of course, a large portion of the impetus for a reevaluation flowed from the highly damaging settlement the SPLC had to reach with former Islamic radical, Maajid Nawaz. After falsely calling Nawaz an “extremist” in its “Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists,” the SPLC settled with him for $3.375 million in June 2018. Richard Cohen, the SPLC’s president, also had to read and post online a humiliating apology to Nawaz that showed the reckless and careless nature of their misguided push to label him an extremist. The SPLC’s ability to deflect and parry seems to have ended with its March 13 firing of Morris Dees, its co-founder and leader for almost five decades. Dees’ termination was accompanied by a terse, opaque pronouncement. In the statement on its website, the SPLC ascribes to itself the values of “truth, justice, equity, and inclusion” and alludes to Dees as “one of our own who fail[ed] to meet those standards.” No further explanation was or has been provided.
    [Show full text]