Senate Confirms Libertarian-Minded Jurist Don Willett to Federal Judgeship
Willett confirmed to a seat on the 5th Circuit by 50-47 vote.

Today the U.S. Senate confirmed Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Willett to a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, the federal appellate court whose jurisdiction covers federal districts in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. Willett was confirmed by a vote of 50-47.
Since joining the Texas Supreme Court in 2005, Willett has made a name for himself as a sharp critic of overreaching state government.
In Patel v. Texas Department of Licensing Regulation (2015), for example, Willett skewered state officials for requiring eyebrow threaders to obtain an expensive government license before engaging in the entirely harmless act of threading cotton string through customers' eyebrows to remove old hair and skin.
"This case is fundamentally about the American Dream and the unalienable human right to pursue happiness without curtsying to government on bended knee," he wrote in Patel. "It is about whether government can connive with rent-seeking factions to ration liberty unrestrained, and whether judges must submissively uphold even the most risible encroachments." (Disclosure: Willett's Patel opinion favorably cited my book Overruled).
Willett proved to be equally scornful of the state's civil asset forfeiture regime. When the Texas Supreme Court declined to take up the civil asset forfeiture case Zaher El-Ali v. Texas in 2014, for instance, Willett faulted his colleagues for effectively failing to do their judicial duty. "Does our Constitution have anything to say about a 'presumed guilty' proceeding in which citizens are not arrested or tried, much less convicted, but are nonetheless punished, losing everything they've worked for?" he complained.
Now that Willett has been successfully confirmed to the federal bench, I fully expect that he will bring the same heightened degree of judicial scrutiny to the misdeeds of the federal government.
Related: From Bork to Willett: Is the Conservative Legal Movement Going Libertarian?
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
the entirely harmless act of threading cotton string through customers' eyebrows to remove old hair and skin.
Hey! Who *knows* where that string might have been!
Or that eyebrow? Navel or anus?
This Libertarian Moment brought to you by the presidential candidate Reason was unanimously opposed to.
A more Libertarian President...then the Libertarian candidate would've been.
You're welcome.
AND NOTHING ELSE HAPPENED
Gorsuch? DeVos? Zinke?
Ajit Pai?
Do you mean the candidate that was not HRC, whatever his name is?
Here are the reasons the Senate should have opposed Willett - he is a right-wing extremist! (/sarc) -
http://bit.ly/2yoDIgq
Welp, I don't need any Viagra tonight.
How about want?
Could use.
Tequila and Xanax does that to me sometimes.
Some of that is typical crazy leftie government gobbling, but some of the other stuff is troubling.
If I've learned anything from reading Reason, it is that libertarian-leaning almost always means not a libertarian. Something tells me Willett is going to be terrible on 1st Amendment and 4th Amendment issues.
I understand. Better is the enemy of the best in your opinion. And you're an asshole.
Libertarian-leaning explicitly means not a libertarian.
And undoubtedly better than the batshit crazies the other presidential candidate probably would have nominated. I'm guessing we'd have gotten some kind of transgender member of a religious minority.
Gee, no Democrat voted for him.
Shocker.
Didn't one of them try to make an issue of him making a joke about marrying bacon?
Joking about marrying bacon is a weak slippery-slope argument against marriage equality. If he made such a crude remark, it should disqualify him from the federal bench.
Furthermore, the fact that no Democrat voted for him illustrates how important it is for Democrats to retake the Senate. Let's hope for a WAVE ELECTION in 2018!
FREEDOM!
"One of them"? It was none other than Al Franken, the most humorless man in washington.
Then he was destroyed by the big bacon cartel.
"During a hearing on Wednesday, Franken scolded Don Willett, a nominee for federal court, for an old tweet about marrying bacon. "I don't get it," Franken said. "But sometimes when you don't get a joke, it's because it wasn't a joke."
Followed by a nervous titter circulating through the room....
I would. If it were wrapping shrimp.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkidIdQgg8o
MAGA
Thank God Matt Welch's preferred candidates didn't win the presidency
I have only one favorite. The guy with a boot on his head. Anyone else just lends credibility to the others, who are pigs with their noses in the trough. Root hog! Or die! That's our current situation.
Does Willett's judicial philosophy embrace the idea that the federal government should have no power to limit immigration, and no power to deport people? Unless he believes that, he isn't a real libertarian.
OK, I get it, you're being sarcastic. How long will you keep up this particular vehicle of sarcasm?
Was Shikha Dalmia being sarcastic when she wrote the piece my name links to? Of course not. And neither am I. Some of us correctly realize that in order to be a real libertarian, the first thing you need to do is support open borders. It's non-negotiable.
YOUR ANARCHY IS SCARING THE SHIT OUT OF ME RIGHT NOW! I'M CALLING THE COPS!11!
He'll keep it up for another week and then go back to his glib echo chamber.
You're nitpicking. He's pulling in our direction. Grab the fucking rope, pantywaist.
So not a single Democrat voted for the libertarian?
Perhaps the cocktail party crowd isn't sympathetic to libertarians when push comes to shove? Reason Staffers, please take note.
Whatever, he'll be making case law. Also, eat my shorts.
I'll hold judgment until the women he groped finally work up the courage.
If they're hot enough, I'll volunteer for his Presidential campaign.
I can only hope that any decision he writes is smattered with IowaHawk tweets.
More like:
"Counsel have neglected a key jurisdictional issue. Sad!"
"Once again, my colleagues have statist dick so deep inside them it's tickling the back of their throats."
The soft bigotry of low expectations: republicans are supposed to be the adults so they criticize their corruption, while democrats are supposed to be the irresponsible children, so they praise their not-as-bad-as-usual failures in the hopes it will encourage them.
Also liberals mean well (they just go about it wrong, using tyranny and political imprisonment and whatnot to try and control thoughts..), while the conservative wing of the republican party are soulless murderous savages from the movie deliverance (the closest most reason staff has come to seeing one).
+1 pig (or 14-year old girl) squeal
So the 47 dems who voted againt him, is that tribal? I need reason to tell me if it was tribal, to be sure.
I wonder what would happen if H&R switched commenters with Volokh Conspiracy?
It was really weird reading their posts this morning and how polite and positive they were.
I suspect Reason is crossing its fingers on this one, hoping the beloved H&R uncles in the attic don't try to come downstairs into the dining room.
H&R beloved uncles; are you going to name names or just let it lie there?
Yep! Though I disapprove of etiquette, "Welcome!"
Life in Trump's America
Aw heck.
Third time's the charm?
No.
Attention: anyone who thinks Crusty Juggalo and I are the same person: I would never fuck up links so badly.
Only cucks recognize embarrassment and shame.
http://www.wtxl.com/news/colle.....3341b.html
zip drives in 2017?
"Alfredo sauce?" Yeah, right.
Florida is the Ohio of the south.
And kindergarten kids that shit their pants. Which also pretty much defines legislators.
OpenBordersLiberal-tarian|12.13.17 @ 8:28PM|#
"Attention: anyone who thinks Crusty Juggalo and I are the same person: I would never fuck up links so badly."
This asshole is commie-kid, hoping that trying a new sock will wash the stink of supporting mass murder off of him.
Asshole, it doesn't. You still smell to high heaven.
Oh god. Reasonable broke for me.
"Libertarian minded"? Does that means he looks at his fellow female judges and thinks, "would, would, wouldn't, would if drunk"?
Or "would if she kept her mouth shut".
For all the nonsense that goes along with Trump he is getting very good advice on most of his judicial appointments.