Concerns Over Judicial Selection in the America First Movement

Theo Wald, who previously served as a deputy assistant secretary for domestic policy under President Trump, recently discussed the America First movement’s approach to judicial selection. He described a key error as entrusting these decisions to what he labeled “an old-fashioned Republican country club” during an appearance on Breitbart News Daily.

When host Mike Slater inquired about the Supreme Court’s handling of birthright citizenship cases, Wald emphasized that this situation exemplifies the problems arising from allowing the Republican establishment to dictate judicial choices. He lamented that America First advocates seem to have overlooked important attributes in judicial candidates, opting instead for criteria that align more closely with traditional Republican values.

“It feels like a significant blunder,” he remarked, pointing out that this strategy has led to a focus on proceduralists and academics who delve into the finer details of the law rather than embodying the boldness and principles sought by the movement. He highlighted “courage of the masses” as a vital characteristic that’s often missed in this selection process.

Wald argued that this courage is essential for tackling contentious issues that may challenge prevailing beliefs. He explained that in court submissions, it’s common to start with three liberal votes already against you, making it challenging to sway opinions based on nuanced legal arguments.

Regarding birthright citizenship cases, Wald stated, “The court’s reality is pretty clear.” He went on to analyze the dynamics among the justices, identifying Alito and Thomas as somewhat aligned with the administration’s perspective, while holding reservations about Gorsuch’s unpredictability on certain issues.

Wald contended that the core of the issue—civil rights and consent in governance—is easily grasped by the average person, yet judicial selection continues to elevate establishment figures, complicating fundamental realities for America First supporters. “If you try explaining this to the grandma at dinner, she’ll get it. But the court seems fixated on peripheral topics,” he noted.

Reflecting on the discussions surrounding the cases, Wald expressed frustration: “It felt like we were lost in some academic debate, disconnected from the everyday realities most Americans face.” He suggested that this disconnection was reflected in the questions posed by the justices.