
Michael Fragoso
Fellow
Michael A. Fragoso is a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in the Constitution, the Courts, and the Culture Program, where he writes and speaks on issues relating to the law, the federal judiciary, and Congress. His writing has appeared in The Wall Street Journal, National Review, The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy: Per Curiam, and elsewhere.
Michael A. Fragoso is a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in the Constitution, the Courts, and the Culture Program, where he writes and speaks on issues relating to the law, the federal judiciary, and Congress. His writing has appeared in The Wall Street Journal, National Review, The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy: Per Curiam, and elsewhere.
Fragoso, an attorney in private practice, has served in all three branches of the federal government. He was most recently chief counsel in the Office of the Republican Leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), where he served as Sen. McConnell’s primary legal advisor and was responsible for, among other things, judicial nominations, immigration, antitrust, constitutional law, and legal issues relating to the Senate and national security.
For the last decade Fragoso has played a central role in judicial confirmations. He was chief counsel for nominations and constitutional law for Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC), under whose chairmanship he was responsible for the committee’s consideration of Justice Amy Coney Barrett and over eighty lower-court nominees. He also served as deputy assistant attorney general for nominations in the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Policy, where he directed the Department’s work on over a hundred judicial nominations.
Before his time at the Department of Justice, Fragoso had a variety of positions in the office Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), eventually serving as legislative director and chief counsel to the Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law. In those roles he managed the judicial-selection process for Arizona, led Sen. Flake’s work on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and orchestrated the successful repeal of the FCC’s data-privacy rule via the Congressional Review Act.
Fragoso started his career as a litigation associate at Kirkland & Ellis LLP and as a law clerk to the Hon. Diane S. Sykes on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. He received his J.D. from Notre Dame Law School, where he was executive articles editor of the Notre Dame Law Review and president of Jus Vitae, and his A.B. in Classics from Princeton University.
When Judges Should Hang Up Their Robes
Michael Fragoso
Staying too long can damage a legacy.
Articles
National Review / January 31, 2025
By Ruling on TikTok, the Supreme Court Inadvertently Kept It Alive
Michael Fragoso
Had SCOTUS simply denied the emergency-docket application, things would have had the chance to proceed normally, and TikTok would have been held to account.
Articles
National Review Online / January 31, 2025
The Washington Lawyers Who Suddenly Love Trump
Michael Fragoso
Firms that blacklisted his officials in 2020 are now claiming special expertise to work with them in 2025.
Articles
Wall Street Journal / January 21, 2025
Joe Biden’s Final Attack on the Courts
Michael Fragoso
In the end, Biden’s decision to veto the JUDGES Act can only be explained as a petty act of revenge against his predecessor and successor, President-elect Donald Trump. Republicans would do well to remember his partisan gracelessness next Congress when Democrats invariably make high-minded, self-interested appeals in the judicial wars.
Articles
The Public Discourse / January 9, 2025
Congressional Responses to Loper Bright
Michael Fragoso
Abstract The Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision, doing away with Chevron deference, set the stage for a reordering of the relationship between Congress and…
Articles
Foundation for American Innovation / November 20, 2024
Abortion and the Courts: Judicial Nominations Are Imperfect but Matter
Michael Fragoso
Criticism that Republican justices have only hurt the pro-life cause is misguided, because Republican presidents from Reagan onward have deliberately tried to advance judicial conservatism through federal court appointees—a commitment that has brought victories both for judicial conservatism and the pro-life cause. The second of a two part series.
Articles
Public Discourse / August 30, 2012