Law Justice Amy Coney Barrett Megathread

So the announcer at the rose garden announced her as she walked out with the president.

will find an article soon.

e: he official announced her as his third pick.

e2:

---------------------------------------------
Article Start

The long-term academic, appeals court judge and mother of seven was the hot favourite for the Supreme Court seat.

Donald Trump - who as sitting president gets to select nominees - reportedly once said he was "saving her" for this moment: when elderly Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died and a vacancy on the nine-member court arose.

It took the president just over a week to fast-track the 48-year-old conservative intellectual into the wings. This is his chance to tip the court make-up even further to the right ahead of the presidential election, when he could lose power.

Barrett's record on gun rights and immigration cases imply she would be as reliable a vote on the right of the court, as Ginsburg was on the left, according to Jonathan Turley, a professor of law at George Washington University.

"Ginsburg maintained one of the most consistent liberal voting records in the history of the court. Barrett has the same consistency and commitment," he adds. "She is not a work-in-progress like some nominees. She is the ultimate 'deliverable' for conservative votes."

And her vote, alongside a conservative majority, could make the difference for decades ahead, especially on divisive issues such as abortion rights and the Affordable Care Act (the Obama-era health insurance provider).

Barrett's legal opinions and remarks on abortion and gay marriage have made her popular with the religious right, but earned vehement opposition from liberals.

But as a devout Catholic, she has repeatedly insisted her faith does not compromise her work.

Barrett lives in South Bend, Indiana, with her husband, Jesse, a former federal prosecutor who is now with a private firm. The couple have seven children, including two adopted from Haiti. She is the oldest of seven children herself.

Known for her sharp intellect, she studied at the University of Notre Dame's Law School, graduating first in her class, and was a clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia, who, in her words, was the "staunchest conservative" on the Supreme Court at the time.

Like her mentor Scalia, she is an originalist, which is a belief that judges should attempt to interpret the words of the Constitution as the authors intended when they were written.

Many liberals oppose that strict approach, saying there must be scope for moving with the times.

Barrett has spent much of her career as a professor at her alma mater, Notre Dame, where she was voted professor of the year multiple times. One of students, Deion Kathawa, who took a class with her earlier this year, told the BBC she was popular because she involved everyone in discussions. He found her "collegial, civil, fair-minded, intellectually sharp, and devoted to the rule of law secured by our Constitution".

Another student told the WBEZ new site: "I feel somewhat conflicted because … she's a great professor. She never brought up politics in her classroom... But I do not agree with her ideologies at all. I don't think she would be good for this country and the Supreme Court."

Barrett was selected by President Trump to serve as a federal appeals court judge in 2017, sitting on the Seventh Circuit, based in Chicago. She regularly commutes to the court from her home - more than an hour and half away. The South Bend Tribune once carried an interview from a friend saying she was an early riser, getting up between 04:00 and 05:00. "It's true," says Paolo Carozza, a professor at Notre Dame. "I see her at the gym shortly after then."

Carozza has watched Barrett go from student to teacher to leading judge, and speaks about her effusively. "It's a small, tight-knit community, so I know her socially too. She is ordinary, warm, kind."

A religious man himself, he thinks it is reasonable to question a candidate about whether their beliefs would interfere with their work. "But she has answered those questions forcefully... I fear she is now being reduced to an ideological caricature, and that pains me, knowing what a rich and thoughtful person she is."

Her confirmation hearing for the appeals court seat featured a now-infamous encounter with Senator Dianne Feinstein, who voiced concerns about how her faith could affect her thinking on the law. "The dogma lives loudly within you," said Mrs Feinstein in an accusatory tone. Defiant Catholics adopted the phrase as a tongue-in-cheek slogan on mugs.

Barrett has defended herself on multiple occasions. "I would stress that my personal church affiliation or my religious belief would not bear in the discharge of my duties as a judge," she once said.

However, her links to a particularly conservative Christian faith group, People of Praise, have been much discussed in the US press. LGBT groups have flagged the group's network of schools, which have guidelines stating a belief that sexual relations should only happen between heterosexual married couples.

LGBTQ advocacy group Human Rights Campaign has voiced strong opposition to Barrett's confirmation, declaring her an "absolute threat to LGBTQ rights".

The Guttmacher Institute, a pro-choice research organisation, declined comment on Barrett specifically, but said appointing any new conservative Supreme Court justice would "be devastating for sexual and reproductive health and rights".

To secure the position on the Supreme Court - a lifelong job - Barrett will still have to pass a gruelling confirmation hearing, where Democratic senators are likely to take a tough line, bringing up many of their voters' concerns.

Professor Turley thinks she will take it her stride, due to the "civil and unflappable disposition" she showed during the hostile questioning for the appeals court position.

"She is someone who showed incredible poise and control… her [appeals court] confirmation hearing was a dry run for a Supreme Court confirmation. She has already played in the World Series."

article end
---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------
Article Start

President Trump on Saturday announced he has chosen Amy Coney Barrett as his pick to fill the Supreme Court seat vacated by the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg -- a move that could significantly shift the nation's highest court to the right if she's confirmed by the Senate.

“Today it is my honor to nominate one of our nation's most brilliant and gifted legal minds to the Supreme Court," Trump said in the Rose Garden alongside Barrett. "She is a woman of unparalleled achievement, towering intellect, sterling credentials and unyielding loyalty to the Constitution -- Judge Amy Coney Barrett.”

Trump announced Barrett, a judge on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, who had been considered by Trump for the vacancy left by the retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy in 2018. Trump eventually chose now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh instead.

Ginsburg, a liberal trailblazer who was a consistent vote on the court’s liberal wing, died last week at 87. The announcement sets up what is likely to be a fierce confirmation battle as Republicans attempt to confirm Barrett before the election on Nov. 3.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has promised to put the nominee up for a vote, despite the objections of Senate Democrats -- who cite McConnell’s refusal to give Obama nominee Merrick Garland a hearing in 2016.

A source familiar with the process told Fox News that Oct. 12 is the target date for the beginning of confirmation hearings. This means that Barrett, 48, could potentially be confirmed by the end of the month and just days before the election.

Barrett, a former Notre Dame professor and a mother of seven, is a devout Catholic and pro-life -- beliefs that were raised as a problem by Democrats during her 2017 confirmation hearing to her seat on the 7th Circuit.

"The dogma lives loudly within you, and that's of concern," Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., told Barrett. She was eventually confirmed 55-43.

Trump was also believed to have been considering candidates including 11th Circuit Judge Barbara Lagoa. Trump had said publicly that he had five potential picks he was considering.

A source told Fox News that Trump had taken note of how “tough” Barrett was when she faced the tough confirmation fight in 2017 and had kept her very much at the front of his mind since then.

The source said Trump met her during the considerations on who to replace Kennedy in 2018, talked to a lot of people about her and wanted to keep her in place through the Kavanaugh vetting process in case there was an issue. Kavanaugh did face hurdles in his confirmation battle, but that came after his nomination was announced.

The source said that after Ginsburg died, Barrett was the only candidate he met and spoke with at length, although he made a few calls to Lagoa because some people were pushing him very hard to do so. But ultimately Barrett was always at the front of Trump’s mind to fill a Ginsburg vacancy.

Should she be confirmed, Barrett would be Trump’s third Supreme Court confirmation. That’s more than two-term Presidents Barack Obama, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush -- who each put two justices on the court.

Democrats have vowed to oppose the pick, but the Senate math does not appear to be in their favor. Republicans have 53 Senate seats and Barrett only needs 50 to be confirmed -- with Vice President Mike Pence acting as a tie breaker in such a case.

So far, only Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Susan Collins, R-Maine, have indicated they oppose moving forward with a confirmation before the election. Murkowski has since suggested she still may vote for the nominee.

Fox News' John Roberts, Mike Emanuel and Tyler Olson contributed to this report.

article end
---------------------------------------------
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Cancer is the kind of thing I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. It has to be immensely stressful for not only her, but everyone that cares about her.

That said, it's irrelevant to even her own argument, and she uses it to tug at heartstrings to elicit a sympathy she would never dream of extending to others if it didn't convenience her. She never had to worry about coverage for her medical costs. It was subtle, so I didn't flip into "I can't stand this hoe" mode, but it's underhanded, and I'm almost certain she doesn't expect for the people watching to recognize the irrelevancy of her personal anecdote.

I hope she recovers totally, and then subsequently pisses off. If you can qualify a liability as a negative asset, I guess Graham wasn't lying.

If ACA is so great why are the politicians in that room not using plans available through ACA? Oh right it is because it is garbage.

Cory, we need to teach women to not get pregnant if they don't want to be pregnant, and we need to teach men to not get women pregnant if they're not going to immediately marry them and take care of the children. No amount of euphemism will ever paper over the fact that you're concerned about the makeshift right to kill your children, and that's only because you're a career Democrat politician and probably don't have any actual beliefs.

Also, you have to admire Cory ignoring the fact that this election will almost certainly be contested and the worst possible civil scenario is a 4-4 split in the SCOTUS. This is absolutely necessary.

I can distinctly remember that people supporting abortion used the following as a cornerstone of their movement:

Women will never use abortion as a contraceptive measure.

Now a cornerstone of their defense is that women need abortion as contraception.
 
Amy Coney Barrett went to my all-girls high school. I hope she's not confirmed
archive

I was hoping for an "Amy Coney Barrett gave me a swirlie" moment, but at least she "misgendered transwomen" in lectures.

---

"It was a freak show! It looked like the Cantina bar singing out of Star Wars!"
I will note they just make an assertion that ACB is against Brown v. Board, Obergefell v. Hodges, or Roe v. Wade therefore bad instead of explaining the flaws in her judicial reasoning.

It's kind of like Citizens United, all the Democrats say is unlimited money in elections without actually saying we should be able to ban media companies from make political attack videos and putting them on YT or giving them out as DVDs.

While the right is not perfect, I have seen an increase in the corruption of language and ideas among the left. Most often, the just resort to one liners or accusations to dismiss an idea or person no matter if such a response is false. It's just to grab the public's consciousness rather than discussing an idea in good faith.
 
I can distinctly remember that people supporting abortion used the following as a cornerstone of their movement:

Women will never use abortion as a contraceptive measure.

Now a cornerstone of their defense is that women need abortion as contraception.

I remember when gay marriage was still an issue and the crazy people opposing it (not even the normies opposing it) would say that eventually they will want everyone to gay marry.

In 2020, if you refuse to have sex with a transwoman than you are a hateful bigot and will get kicked out of the LGBTQ+.
 
Amy Coney Barrett went to my all-girls high school. I hope she's not confirmed
archive

I was hoping for an "Amy Coney Barrett gave me a swirlie" moment, but at least she "misgendered transwomen" in lectures.

---

Senator Kennedy: "It was a freak show! It looked like the Cantina bar singing out of Star Wars!"

"Amy Coney Barrett, Donald Trump’s nominee for the US supreme court, went to my all-girls Catholic high school. We wore the same black-and-white plaid skirts and saddle oxfords and roamed the same halls, although nearly a decade apart."

A decade apart! What garbage. Her speculations don't have anymore credibility than any other freelance writer's they could've scooped up but lucky for them they found one they could wring a good headline out of.

Beyond the obvious, the arguments in this article are so insulting and dumb. She's implying that Barrett was not only brainwashed by her high school but hasn't developed intellectually throughout her many years of higher education, instruction, and experience as a judge. Arguing that she's an evil theocrat that wants to force women to have babies and then kill them by denying them healthcare is stupid but arguing that she's unintelligent and subservient is just mind-boggling. Same as all those tweets calling her a handmaiden/Stepford wife that pumps out babies and bakes cassaroles. She's undeniably, incredibly accomplished.
 
You can smell the rotten pussy on this woman.
View attachment 1656863
Lol it's just her and her dog, no husband or lesbian partner. Bet you all she fucks it with how bitter she's coming off in those tweets.

Oh my god, this is the chick that wrote that fucking cable guy fanfiction for the Huffington Post.


Complete with a sad housewife cowering from her ebil conservative husband. If you know anyone in the cable business, you know this is a complete crock of fucking bullllllllSHITE.
 
"Amy Coney Barrett, Donald Trump’s nominee for the US supreme court, went to my all-girls Catholic high school. We wore the same black-and-white plaid skirts and saddle oxfords and roamed the same halls, although nearly a decade apart."
It's a Catholic high school that obviously failed miserably in the education of the author of this miserable piece. It should withdraw her diploma, presuming she stuck around long enough to get one.
 
What the fuck does ANY of this have to do with "will you uphold the Constitution?"

I mean, that's rhetorical. This is all theater for show.
I used to think the theater aspect came about when these things began to be televised, and I'm sure that exaggerated things, but now I think they were theatrical before that too - just a smaller show, for the people in the room, and also with the hope the performances would be "powerful" enough to bleed out into newspaper articles of the time.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Salubrious
"Amy Coney Barrett, Donald Trump’s nominee for the US supreme court, went to my all-girls Catholic high school. We wore the same black-and-white plaid skirts and saddle oxfords and roamed the same halls, although nearly a decade apart."

A decade apart! What garbage. Her speculations don't have anymore credibility than any other freelance writer's they could've scooped up but lucky for them they found one they could wring a good headline out of.

Beyond the obvious, the arguments in this article are so insulting and dumb. She's implying that Barrett was not only brainwashed by her high school but hasn't developed intellectually throughout her many years of higher education, instruction, and experience as a judge. Arguing that she's an evil theocrat that wants to force women to have babies and then kill them by denying them healthcare is stupid but arguing that she's unintelligent and subservient is just mind-boggling. Same as all those tweets calling her a handmaiden/Stepford wife that pumps out babies and bakes cassaroles. She's undeniably, incredibly accomplished.
Has any GOP senator pointed out that the denial of an accomplished woman to a prestigious position in life because of her social leanings is bigoted yet?
 
Go to church and accept Christ, heathen.
Church is the best dating site.
It's a Catholic high school that obviously failed miserably in the education of the author of this miserable piece. It should withdraw her diploma, presuming she stuck around long enough to get one.
it just means the author was, is and might always be an idiot. it's not like parochial schools only let in catholic students.
 
Back