Zach Carstens

Zach Carstens is a litigation associate at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP in Dallas, Texas. Previously, he clerked for Judge Brantley Starr of the Northern District of Texas and Justice Jeffrey S. Boyd of the Texas Supreme Court. He graduated magna cum laude from Pepperdine Caruso School of Law, where he served as Editor-in-Chief of the Pepperdine Law Review, Vice President of the Federalist Society, and a board member of Christian Legal Society. During law school, he worked at the Office of the Texas Solicitor General. Prior to law school, he was a preacher at a church in Texas. He graduated from Abilene Christian University with degrees in English and Biblical Text.

---

What is your current position?

I am a litigator at the Dallas office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP.  I’m also a father to my six-month-old daughter and the occasional fill-in preacher at a few local churches.

What inspired you to choose this career path?

Before law school, I spent two years working as a preacher in Texas. My time in ministry provided a unique perspective into both the mindset of my generation and the spiritual and philosophical movements underpinning America’s shifting cultural landscape. One of the most striking trends I encountered was a knee-jerk revulsion to what many in the church refer to as “getting too political.” Modern American Christians, I realized, are shying away from civic engagement, afraid to acknowledge the inherently moral framework of American government and philosophy. Politically progressive churchgoers often lack this apprehension. The gradual effect on our national moral outlook has become unmistakable as the church continues to abdicate its authority and God-given role in society.

As my concern over Christian aversion to political and cultural engagement mounted, I also became aware of an undeniable trend in my generation I categorize as “anti-patriotism.” Millennials like me have endured a lifetime of constant, cacophonous voices—from social media influencers to public school history teachers—preaching against American exceptionalism, our nation’s founders, and our country’s defining role in modern world history. An entire generation has been mobilized against the very government and political philosophy that enabled its education, safety, and freedom. When I decided to go to law school, it was not a change in my vocation; it was the culmination of a calling to minister to my confused generation, and the decision to equip myself to get involved and be useful in the fight.

How did you hear about the Claremont Institute?

I started listening to the American Mind podcast and reading the site before law school, and that led me to the Claremont Review of Books. I still read every issue and recommend it all the time—you can’t find more incisive, unique, and truthful commentary on cutting-edge issues anywhere else. These resources began shaping my thinking as I began law school, and from there I encountered peers who’d participated in Claremont fellowships. I immediately knew I wanted to get involved.

What is your fondest memory of the Claremont Institute?

The first night, all the fellows stayed up absurdly late debating a parade of issues so controversial I won’t even list them here—you can probably imagine. Broadly, this touched on theology, history, education, immigration, pop culture, Trump, Catholicism vs. Protestantism, foreign policy, conspiracy theories, all the most controversial online right-wing figures, Originalism, bitcoin, and even the Privileges and Immunities Clause. By the end of that night, my “filter” was completely down. Outside my immediate family and closest friends, it’s nearly impossible to find people with whom I can completely relax and share my true beliefs without fear of offense or cancellation. The fact that our first day at Claremont created such an atmosphere speaks to the high caliber of fellows it attracts and the true, deep friendships it builds.

There are all sorts of educational programs out there for current and rising conservative professionals. What do you think makes the Claremont Institute’s Fellowships unique?

Claremont equips its fellows with a clear vision for America based on the fundamental truths of history and natural law. This is lightyears away from the reactionary, apologetic conservatism that I grew up watching lose elections, culture wars, and policy battles in the face of organized and ruthless opposition. Claremont fellowships describe a positive, achievable vision for America. It’s more than just “conserving” and it refuses to settle for merely opposing our enemies’ objectives. Claremont’s fellowships are attuned to our dire cultural moment and are realistic about the stakes of the battle ahead, and they actually provide resources, ideas, and networks to fight and win that battle.

Who would it be, why, and what would you discuss, if you could have a conversation with an American Founder or any great thinker?

I’d want to update James Madison on how his Constitution and Bill of Rights have fared over the centuries and get his feedback on how we can fix them. Among other topics, I want to hear his thoughts on: How to repair the separation of powers; How to recalibrate the system of checks and balances; What he thinks about the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Amendments; and How to balance the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses in a religiously pluralistic and atheistic society.

What would the artifact be, if you could hold one piece of history from the early founding of our country and why?

I would want to hold the letters that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson exchanged with their wives (both named Martha), which were burned after their deaths and lost to history. The correspondence of John and Abigail Adams paints such a captivating picture of their relationship, their beliefs, and the colorful characters they interacted with on the stage of history. I’m disappointed we don’t have that window into the minds of Washington and Jefferson. Also, I believe the letters would confirm the honorable character of these great men, even if they also shed light on their inner conflicts and shortcomings.

Do you have a favorite quote?  If so, why does it resonate with you?

John 1:1: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

Mark Twain: “The difference between the almost right word and the right word is really a large matter—it’s the difference between the lightning bug and the lightning.”

My life’s pursuit could be summed up as “finding the right word.” Whether I’m writing a legal argument, a poem, a sermon, or a tweet, one of my greatest (and nerdiest) passions is achieving precision through language. God created the universe with words, reveals himself through written Scripture, and sent his Son as the Word become flesh. We rely on imperfect language for our most vital needs: forging relationships, exchanging ideas, expressing beauty, teaching, remembering, arguing, questioning. Language is the speed limit of thought. The more words we have on hand, the more thoughts we can think. All our greatest ideas and passions die with us unless we find the words to share them.

Language is more important today than ever because it’s under attack on an unprecedented scale. In “1984,” George Orwell’s villains declare: “The Revolution will be complete when the language is perfect” (another favorite quote). They’re referring to their evil project of Newspeak, an all-too-familiar scheme to control thought by limiting vocabulary. God’s self-revelation in the form of “the Word,” Jesus Christ, ensures that this mind-control plot is doomed to ultimate failure, but in the meantime, we must resist efforts to control language and continue to wage the war of words that’s coming to define this generation.

What is the most distinctive attribute/character of the people in the state where you grew up that you genuinely admire?

Steinbeck wrote that “Texas is a state of mind.” Despite being a Californian, he was correct. Even today, every Texan carries himself with the self-assurance that comes with pulling off a Revolution and a Republic on par with our American counterpart, complete with political innovations, inspiring heroes, and epic last stands, and culminating in a righteous victory against overwhelming odds. True Texans take unapologetic pride in our land’s epic story and know that we live today as the heirs of leaders and warriors like Stephen F. Austin, Sam Houston, Rip Ford, and Audie Murphy. I admire Texans because they’re hospitable, patriotic, loyal, and brave. I admire their hardheaded rejection of the detached, humanistic philosophies that animate the globalism currently melting down the American identity—Texans think and act concretely, in terms of land and power, family and faith. Most of all, I admire the unshakeable certainty Texans maintain in their right to live as a free people and in their willingness to fight for what they love.