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:
How did the jew 'break barriers' by being the 2nd person to do something?
It's better not to focus on the fact that Ginsburg had two X chromosomes, but on what her actual decisions were, and the fact that she spent decades before being nominated arguing before the Supreme Court on countless gender discrimination cases. Love her or hate her, but her judicial legacy is significant, and she and Scalia are probably equally influential on modern day US Constitutional Law.

This isn't to denigrate O'Connor, but Ginsburg arguably had a greater impact because as the de facto leader of the liberal wing of the court and because she had a longer tenure, she was responsible for writing a lot more opinions.
 
Man, reading the news coverage of this has me mad at the internet unironically. MSM Journalists are such fucking scum. How they deliberately and unashamedly try and shape people's thoughts without any regard for acting in good faith or even the basic facts is truly disgusting.

The division they're falsely creating and the momentous delusions they've instilled in the country make me fucking sick. The amount of people who have had their lives detailed, destroyed or doomed due to their actions is staggering. The fact that they don't even pretend anymore and the average person is forced to just live with it is the biggest tragedy of the decade. I hope someway or somehow these people get their comeuppance for the irreversible damage they've done to discourse in this country.
At Trump rally in Johnstown, Pennsylvania the crowd is chanting "CNN sucks." So you are not alone in your appraisal.
 
Fudd liberals always trot out this line when they shill for gun control. "I'm pro-2A but....".

Suddenly it's a sign of insurmountable bias when someone these pricks don't like uses it? Dems truly are the Party of It's Okay When We Do It.



Are only Lizard People allowed to run for office in Connecticut?
View attachment 1659839

Will anyone, anyone at all be surprised when Blumenthal finally gets popped for molesting kids? (Longstanding rumor is he is high on the list that they give Congressional Pages as to "Who you should never ever get in an elevator with". Creepy Uncle Joe used to be #1)
 
Fudd liberals always trot out this line when they shill for gun control. "I'm pro-2A but....".

Suddenly it's a sign of insurmountable bias when someone these pricks don't like uses it? Dems truly are the Party of It's Okay When We Do It.



Are only Lizard People allowed to run for office in Connecticut?
View attachment 1659839
Have you ever seen Connecticut? I have. It's the worst part on a drive through New England to get to Canada. NYC is impressive. Maine is paradise, New Hampshire is a close second. Massachusetts is optional, but not terrible. Connecticut is a whole different kind of awful. Where it's overpriced as hell and still looks third world. If I-95 didn't go through it, people wouldn't see it and be better off. Rhode Island is as bad but so small its forgettable.
 
Holy shit Louisiana Senator John Kennedy is cringey. Would have probably been a Dixiecrat in the 90s?
 

Attachments

  • sen-john-neely-kennedy-louisiana-frown-1.jpg
    sen-john-neely-kennedy-louisiana-frown-1.jpg
    53.1 KB · Views: 6
Man, reading the news coverage of this has me mad at the internet unironically. MSM Journalists are such fucking scum. How they deliberately and unashamedly try and shape people's thoughts without any regard for acting in good faith or even the basic facts is truly disgusting.

The division they're falsely creating and the momentous delusions they've instilled in the country make me fucking sick. The amount of people who have had their lives detailed, destroyed or doomed due to their actions is staggering. The fact that they don't even pretend anymore and the average person is forced to just live with it is the biggest tragedy of the decade. I hope someway or somehow these people get their comeuppance for the irreversible damage they've done to discourse in this country.
I want bad things to happen to the Washington Post, in Minecraft. Giving Amazon even a penny kills me inside.
 
Holy shit Louisiana Senator John Kennedy is cringey. Would have probably been a Dixiecrat in the 90s?
I personally appreciated his refresher course on Legislation and Regulation but (PL) I'm studying for the bar soon, so it's not necessarily relevant to everyone.

Senator Blackburn, on the other hand, was extremely cringey. She seems like a nice lady, but good God that pandering, holy shit.
 
I personally appreciated his refresher course on Legislation and Regulation but (PL) I'm studying for the bar soon, so it's not necessarily relevant to everyone.

Senator Blackburn, on the other hand, was extremely cringey. She seems like a nice lady, but good God that pandering, holy shit.
Maybe we're figuring out of what makes a Supreme Court judge truly qualified... putting up these Congress characters and not cracking. Because even though Kavanaugh was drug through the mud, I do not remember such pandering.
 
That blank notebook is a perfect summary of modern day US politics.

The people who are telling the truth don't need a cheat-sheet to tell them what to say and the arguments from the other side are so predictably pathetic that they aren't even worth preparing for.

She's the smartest person in the room and this is all just a waste of time and effort.
 
Maybe we're figuring out of what makes a Supreme Court judge truly qualified... putting up these Congress characters and not cracking. Because even though Kavanaugh was drug through the mud, I do not remember such pandering.
Judging by the few hours that I've watched of her taking questions from these disingenuous fucks, she seems eminently qualified. Being so even tempered and handling people essentially calling her racist, sexist, and homophobic and not having a mental breakdown is more than any normal person is forced to go through for any interview.
 


Talk about being completely out of your league. This has been like watching a sumo wrestler body a bunch of kindergartners. I knew that Barrett was clever before we got into this, but I actually underestimated her. They can't find a single avenue to attack her from and she doesn't even bring any notes with her. Watching someone walk circles around every single question and cite specific cases from memory alone was just fucking wild.
 
View attachment 1660210

Talk about being completely out of your league. This has been like watching a sumo wrestler body a bunch of kindergartners. I knew that Barrett was clever before we got into this, but I actually underestimated her. They can't find a single avenue to attack her from and she doesn't even bring any notes with her. Watching someone walk circles around every single question and cite specific cases from memory alone was just fucking wild.
The way the lady keeps asking the question and then giving that little condescending smirk is actually kinda infuriating.
 
View attachment 1660210

Talk about being completely out of your league. This has been like watching a sumo wrestler body a bunch of kindergartners. I knew that Barrett was clever before we got into this, but I actually underestimated her. They can't find a single avenue to attack her from and she doesn't even bring any notes with her. Watching someone walk circles around every single question and cite specific cases from memory alone was just fucking wild.
The way the lady keeps asking the question and then giving that little condescending smirk is actually kinda infuriating.

That's not just any lady, it's former democrat nominee hopeful Amy Klobuchar. Like Harris, another lightweight lawyer turn politician who is completely intellectually outmatched, not helped by a completely inane line of questioning. This woman thought she was the right choice to fight against Donald Trump. She gets knocked around in a senate hearing, which is unfairly tipped in favour of the senate with lack of being sworn in and it being an unending barrage of questions for hours upon hours. Like Harris, she's a big fat joke.
 
View attachment 1660210

Talk about being completely out of your league. This has been like watching a sumo wrestler body a bunch of kindergartners. I knew that Barrett was clever before we got into this, but I actually underestimated her. They can't find a single avenue to attack her from and she doesn't even bring any notes with her. Watching someone walk circles around every single question and cite specific cases from memory alone was just fucking wild.
ACB is giving Klobuchar the "Dafuq are you going on about?" look but proceeds to school her anyway and make a complete fool out of the old bat. And all the stupid cunt can do is sit there twiddling her thumbs and rolling her eyes about the room.

The shitshow over Kavanaugh really tore them a new asshole that they just haven't recovered (nor learned) from.
 
Back