NCJW opposes Eric Tung. Here’s why:
Mr. Tung’s record is indicative of a disturbing pattern of ideological extremism that calls into question his fitness for the federal bench. From his university writings attacking feminism and gender equality to his legal assaults on worker protections, Mr. Tung has consistently defended those in power over vulnerable people. His defense of the fringe “independent state legislature theory” in Moore v. Harper reveals a hostility towards voting rights and his dismissal of fundamental freedoms like abortion access and marriage equality expose his dangerous prioritization of ideology over justice. His record makes it clear he would not uphold the rights of all if confirmed.
Eric Tung’s stance on important issues:
Gender Equality:
In essays published during his university years, he spoke out against diversity in education and criticized feminist organizations like the National Organization for Women as too radical. He wrote: “I believe in emphasizing family and what it means for a woman to be a good wife or partner,” adding that “when these radical feminists try to blur gender roles, they undermine institutions like marriage — institutions which hold society together.”
Economic Justice:
In Busker v. Wabtec Corporation, Mr. Tung defended a narrow interpretation of California’s prevailing wage laws that stripped protections from public workers and protected corporation’s exploitative loopholes. In Martirosyan v. UPS, Mr. Tung fought to shield UPS from accountability after it denied reasonable accommodations to a disabled worker. As a Yale student, Mr. Tung co-authored an article entitled “Coming Out Conservative,” where he railed against social safety nets as “incentive-killing welfare” and dismissed redistributive policies as “Marxist extremism.” In recent years, Mr. Tung represented the California Hospital Association in a lawsuit to block a $25/hour minimum wage for health care workers.
Civil Rights:
In the voting rights case, Moore v. Harper, Mr. Tung filed a brief backing the radical “independent state legislature theory,” an extremist and discredited view that would grant state legislatures largely unchecked power to suppress voting power that was rejected by the Supreme Court in that landmark case. A self-professed originalist, Mr. Tung gave a speech for the UCLA Federalist Society in which he stated, “whether there’s a constitutional right to abortion, same-sex marriage, sodomy… the answer for the originalist is simple: no.” In his view, only rights explicitly protected at the time of the Constitution’s ratification deserve legal recognition today — a legal philosophy that suggests a radical bias that could well comprise his independence and fairness.
Education and Career Highlights:
Eric Tung received his BA from Yale University and his JD from the University of Chicago. After graduating law school, Mr. Tung clerked for Judge Neil Gorsuch at the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit as well as Justice Gorsuch and Judge Justice Scalia at the Supreme Court. Mr. Tung was a Bristow Fellow for the Office of the Solicitor General, an Associate at Munger, Tolles & Olsen LLP, an Assistant US Attorney for the Central District of California, and Counsel in the Office of Legal Policy at the US Department of Justice. He is currently a partner at Jones Day.