Conservatism, the First Amendment, and National Review

What is "conservatism?" As foundational components of the contemporary political lexicon, the word "conservative" and its purported polar opposite "liberal" are bandied about with reckless abandon. In the rough and tumble of everyday American politics, these terms may be used to validate one's policy preferences, to denigrate another's, or merely to represent one's preferred political team. In the United States, there is, of course, no mainstream political party that adopts these words as their own — there is no Liberal Party or Conservative Party per se as in many countries throughout the world — but there might as well be. For even as the two major parties continue to evolve and adapt to their changing constituencies, today the Democratic Party is generally characterized as liberal and the Republican Party is understood to be conservative. By extension, many members of the judiciary, appointed by these very party politicians, must endure these labels as well, even when such labels are unwelcome.

The word "conservative" does, of course, have a core meaning. The American Heritage Dictionary defines conservative as "favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change. Traditional or restrained in style. Moderate; cautious." However, it also offers these definitions: "Of or relating to the political philosophy of conservatism. Belonging to a conservative party, group, or movement." Thus, when a judge is identified as conservative, it may suggest that her decisions convey a greater degree of respect for tradition, restraint, and caution than is the norm for judges in her class — the median judge. However, use of the identifier "conservative" might also merely indicate that that particular judge is aligned with the Republican Party, that she was nominated by a Republican president, or that her judicial decision making is perceived to be tainted by an ideological bias.

One thing is clear: Conservatism is not monolithic. Political conservatives, just like liberals, do not always see eye-to-eye. As already alluded to, there are readily identifiable tensions that exist among conservatives, the most familiar being the sometimes-contradictory emphasis on economic freedom lauded by free-market conservatives and deeply rooted tradition celebrated by moralistic conservatives. These two ideological camps largely defined the conservative landscape in the years following World War II, a period that marked the emergence of a coherent conservative movement in America. These two strains of conservative thinking do not necessarily conflict — and may indeed be complementary. David Brooks recounted how when he joined the staff of National Review in 1984, "the magazine,