In a recent address at the Heritage Foundation, Judge Amul Thapar, a prominent figure in the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, urged donors to reconsider their financial contributions to law schools that do not embrace or teach originalist theory. According to Thapar, many top law schools lack courses on originalism—a legal philosophy that interprets the Constitution’s meaning as fixed at the time of its enactment—leading to an ideological imbalance among faculty.
Thapar’s remarks come in the context of ongoing debates about the role of originalism in contemporary legal education and court rulings. He stressed that a failure to adequately teach originalist methods has a ripple effect; particularly, he noted that district courts suffer because judges at that level often do not have the historical arguments needed to formulate originalist opinions. Thapar, a Trump appointee who was also mentioned as a potential Supreme Court candidate, emphasized that both appellate judges and practicing lawyers need to be equipped with originalist reasoning to influence court outcomes effectively.
The judge’s comments are part of a broader conversation among conservative judges who express growing dissatisfaction with academic institutions perceived as neglecting conservative principles. Notably, federal judges James Ho and Elizabeth Branch have decided not to hire clerks from certain law schools like Stanford and Yale due to these schools’ reactions to protests against conservative figures. While Thapar sympathizes with their frustrations, he refrained from endorsing a similar hiring boycott, expressing concern about penalizing students for their institution’s policies.
Thapar further argued that genuine change in legal education would depend on the pressures exerted by both taxpayers and donors, advocating for financial leverage as a means to encourage law schools to adapt their curricula. Such reforms, he suggested, could increase the value of a law degree by better preparing graduates for the realities of legal practice in contemporary courts.
For further details on Judge Thapar’s statements and the ongoing discussions regarding originalism in legal education, you can read the full text here.