Opinion Amy Coney Barrett Is Even More Extreme Than Antonin Scalia

02:15  27 september  2020
02:15  27 september  2020 Source:   nymag.com

Republicans have said they want to confirm Amy Coney Barrett before Election Day. Here's how long other confirmations took

  Republicans have said they want to confirm Amy Coney Barrett before Election Day. Here's how long other confirmations took Now that Trump has nominated Amy Coney Barret to the Supreme Court, the issue becomes whether the GOP-led Senate can confirm her before Election Day. Amy Coney Barrett named President Trump's third Supreme Court nominee USA TODAY See more videos SHARE SHARE TWEET SHARE EMAIL What to watch next Hear Amy Coney Barrett's tribute to Ruth Bader Ginsburg CNN Amy Coney Barrett speaks after Trump announces her nomination for Supreme Court CNBC Trump announces Amy Coney Barrett as Supreme Court nominee The Washington Post ‘A great Ameri

Judge Amy Coney Barrett is nominated to the US Supreme Court by President Donald Trump in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, DC on September 26, 2020. "I clerked for Justice Scalia more than twenty years ago, but the lessons I learned still resonate," Barrett said at an event

Amy Coney Barrett has been on Donald Trump's shortlist for Supreme Court vacancies for some time, but the word was that she would be the most appropriate replacement for Ruth Bader Ginsburg. As of last week, that was no longer a hypothetical scenario. Even before Mr Trump reportedly settled on

Until now, one way to describe extreme conservatives was to call them “right of Attila the Hun.” Amy Coney Barrett is even further along that spectrum – she is right of Antonin Scalia.

a man wearing a suit and tie: Oliver Douliery/AFP via Getty Images © Oliver Douliery/AFP via Getty Images Oliver Douliery/AFP via Getty Images

Barrett, President Donald Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, once worked as law clerk for Scalia. Whereas the late Supreme Court justice referred to himself as a “faint-hearted originalist,” who was willing to allow case precedent to influence what he believed to be the original intent of the framers of the Constitution, Barrett makes no such concession. She wrote in a 2013 law review article that stare decisis, the principle that courts should follow prior case decisions, is a “soft rule,” not an “inexorable command,” with “constitutional cases the easiest to overrule.” In that same article, Barrett went on to say words that should shake fear into the two-thirds of Americans who support the Court’s 1973 decision to protect abortion rights in Roe v. Wade: “I tend to agree with those who say that a justice’s duty is to the Constitution and that it is thus more legitimate for her to enforce her best understanding of the Constitution than a precedent that she thinks clearly in conflict with it.”

Amy Coney Barrett pays homage to conservative mentor Antonin Scalia — 'His judicial philosophy is mine too'

  Amy Coney Barrett pays homage to conservative mentor Antonin Scalia — 'His judicial philosophy is mine too' Barrett, a former Notre Dame law professor, drew clear comparisons between her legal philosophy and Scalia's, saying "his judicial philosophy is mine too."Barrett paid homage to the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who led the conservative wing of the high court before his death in 2016, describing him as her mentor.

Amy Coney Barrett 's nomination to the US Supreme Court comes as little surprise. Like her mentor Scalia , she is an originalist, which is a belief that judges should attempt to interpret the words of the Barrett has spent much of her career as a professor at her alma mater, Notre Dame, where she was

President Trump’s nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett creates a real dilemma for the Judge Barrett is going to come across as professional, knowledgeable and likable. She went on to clerk for Judge Laurence Silberman on the DC Court of Appeals and then clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia .

During her confirmation hearings to become a judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, Barrett pledged to keep her beliefs as a devout Catholic separate from her legal opinions. She has only been a federal judge since 2017, and her record on abortion so far is spare. She dissented in a case that struck down an Indiana law that banned abortions on the basis of the sex or disability of a fetus. Before becoming a judge, Barrett was a law professor at Notre Dame Law School, where she was a member of an anti-abortion group called Faculty for Life. With her beliefs about abortion combined with her views on stare decisis, the precedent of Roe faces a real risk being overturned should she ascend to the nation’s highest court.

Bio highlights of Amy Coney Barrett, Trump's high court pick

  Bio highlights of Amy Coney Barrett, Trump's high court pick WASHINGTON (AP) — Here’s a bio box on President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee. Amy Coney Barrett, age 48 - A judge on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals nominated by President Donald Trump in 2017 and considered once before by Trump for a high court seat; her three-year judicial record shows a clear and consistent conservative bent. - A graduate of the University of Notre Dame Law School and Rhodes College who has taught law at Notre Dame, worked for a Washington law firm and clerked for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.- A devout Catholic mother of seven and Louisiana native born in 1972, she would be the youngest justice on the current court if confirmed.

Judge Amy Coney Barrett will likely be the next nominee to the Supreme Court. In fact, she was a law clerk for the late Antonin Scalia , who may be one of the most famous originalists to ever But we knew that already. When Barrett was being confirmed to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals back

Amy Coney Barrett cannot claim the same. Reproductive rights advocacy groups have expressed alarm that Barrett could help overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v Wade decision that Barrett previously served as a clerk to conservative supreme court justice Antonin Scalia , who died in 2016.

In addition to reproductive rights, other issues that had seemed settled by Supreme Court precedent, such as the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act and marriage equality, may become fair game for judicial review with Barrett on the Court. Barrett has expressed conservative views on immigration, gun rights, and discrimination. If the 2020 election is contested and ends up before the Supreme Court, the newest justice could cast a vote that decides the outcome.

Because justices are appointed for life and removable only by impeachment, the stakes are high whenever a vacancy occurs. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, whose death last week created the opening Barrett has been nominated to fill, served on the court for 27 years until her death at age 87. If confirmed, the 48-year-old Barrett could serve on the court for four decades or more, stamping an indelible mark on American life.

Previewing acrimonious confirmation, Democrats coalesce around Amy Coney Barrett opposition

  Previewing acrimonious confirmation, Democrats coalesce around Amy Coney Barrett opposition Democrats objected to both process and the views of Trump's Supreme Court pick, with one senator saying he won't meet with her.One Democratic senator — Connecticut's Richard Blumenthal, who is a member of the Judiciary Committee — said he would not meet with Barrett, as is customary for members of the committee, in protest of Trump’s decision to rush ahead with the nomination so close to an election.

As more reporters confirm that Amy Coney Barrett is Trump’s pick for supreme court nominee, a quick reminder about Barrett served as a law clerk to supreme court justice Antonin Scalia , worked briefly as a private lawyer in DC and became a University of Notre Dame law school professor in 2002.

Amy Coney Barrett is a mother of seven and a devout Catholic — but how that may affect her potential rulings on the Supreme Court remains A favorite of originalists and social conservatives, she clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia . Has written more than 100 decisions and dissents since joining

As a result, Barrett’s confirmation becomes a critically important moment leading up to the 2020 election and beyond. But some Democrats have threatened to boycott the hearings, citing Republican hypocrisy in conducting confirmation hearings during an election year. A boycott would permit confirmation with only cursory questioning of Barrett by GOP senators, and would do a great disservice to our country. Barrett should not be confirmed to the Court without careful public scrutiny of her extreme views. Even if she ultimately receives the 51 votes she needs for confirmation, her record should be laid bare before the electorate so that they can fully understand the consequences of their vote for president in 2016, and the risks at stake in the 2020 election. Elections have consequences, and all Americans should be made to appreciate the consequences of Trump’s presidency.

To be sure, Democrats have a legitimate beef with Senate Republicans. The nomination of Barrett is the second part of a one-two punch by GOP leaders. When Scalia died in February of 2016, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell proclaimed it too close to a presidential election to confirm a successor nominated by President Barack Obama in the last year of his term. McConnell insisted that voters decide who would choose the next Supreme Court justice, rather than allowing a “lame duck president” to fill the vacancy, even though the election was nine months away. “The American people are perfectly capable of having their say on this issue, so let’s give them a voice,” he said in March of that year. “Let’s let the American people decide. The Senate will appropriately revisit the matter when it considers the qualifications of the nominee the next president nominates, whoever that might be.” And so, Obama’s nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, never even received a vote.

Amy Coney Barrett: Talented judge, popular professor brings solid conservative credentials

  Amy Coney Barrett: Talented judge, popular professor brings solid conservative credentials Her nomination to the seat held for 27 years by liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg makes Barrett's nomination the most contentious in decades.HHS secretary spotted without mask at Rose Garden event

Amy Coney Barrett has risen to the top of President Donald Trump’s short list to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Barrett ’s nomination would raise an important new problem: Is there a tension between forthrightly Nor is Barrett like Robert Drinan, a Jesuit priest who served for many years in the U.S

“ Amy Coney Barrett is a respected constitutionalist and an excellent nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court. Much like her mentor, the late Justice Antonin Scalia , she This is about more than one seat. This is about saving our Republic by maintaining the balance of power between our three branches of

Now, in 2020, with the death of Ginsberg occurring less than two months before a presidential election, McConnell is only too eager to confirm Trump’s nominee. Senate Republicans are pushing forward even though Americans, by a 57-38 margin, prefer the next president make the appointment. In their zeal to control the composition of the Court, Republicans have engaged in a hypocritical power play that threatens to undermine the legitimacy of the judiciary.

If Barrett is confirmed, then the Court will include five justices, a majority of the Court, who will have been appointed by presidents who did not win the popular vote. In addition to Barrett, Trump appointed Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. George W. Bush, who lost the popular vote to Al Gore, named John Roberts and Samuel Alito. When justices are installed by presidents who lack democratic support, at some point, the Court itself loses public confidence, and its decisions lose the respect of the people. The Court risks being seen as just one more cog in a political machine.

But the stakes of Barrett’s appointment are too high to abstain in the interest of principle. Barrett needs to be put under a miscroscope not only to determine whether she is fit to serve on the Court, but also to fully reveal to the public the potential consequences of the Republican agenda.

In Barrett, we can expect a justice who will decide cases from a conservative worldview, while being even less bound to precedent than her former boss and mentor. She has written that Scalia’s adherence to precedent at the expense of originalism “in a crunch,” simply proved that he was “human,” and prone to occasional mistakes. “Nothing is flawless,” she wrote, “but I, for one, find it impossible to say that Justice Scalia did his job badly.” Barrett learned at Scalia’s elbow, and is ready to take his jurisprudence one step further.

Fact check: It's true. Ginsburg and Scalia were close friends despite ideological differences .
The "odd couple" of the Supreme Court disagreed on the bench but spent every New Year's Eve together.GPS Web Extra: Zarif on negotiating with US

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks
usr: 1
This is interesting!