On Friday evening, Judge Andrew Oldham of the Fifth Circuit delivered the Barbara K. Olson Memorial Lecture at the National Lawyer's Convention.

I discussed his remarks in my new column at Civitas Outlook. Here is an excerpt:

The world of 2025 is different from the world of 1985. This change raises an inevitable question: Should the Federalist Society, the venerable debating society, also change? This was the theme of Judge Andrew S. Oldham's remarks at the Barbara K. Olson Memorial Lecture. Judge Oldham's speech challenges two FedSoc orthodoxies. First, he asks if the organization should remain, as it always was, a debating society. Second, he questions the merits of expanding the tent to attract more people. He rejects the "libertarian instinct to debate all things" and "focus[] on the big tent" as helping us "los[e] focus on the principles that motivated all of this in the first place." Indeed, Oldham worries that "Big Tentism could turn FedSoc into a right-of-center bar association" where people come to "see and be seen."

At the core of both challenges is Judge Oldham's solemn commitment that originalism provides "clear and objective answers" and that originalists, including FedSoc, should do more to acknowledge those truths. And once the right answer is settled, Oldham would say, there is no reason to debate further. Instead, we should go forth and apply those principles.

And from the conclusion:

I'll close by noting a certain irony. FedSoc chose to invite Judge Oldham to deliver the Olson lecture, likely without knowing what he would discuss. Judge Oldham walked to the podium and laid down what I see as an existential challenge to FedSoc's core commitment to debate. But rather than settling that issue with a clear right-or-wrong answer, Judge Oldham instead started a new debate. And this will not be a debate for the sake of debating.

I thank Judge Oldham for making us think all more deeply about what FedSoc is, and ought to be.