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:
As a gay dude, I hear a lot of my fag pals getting all weepy about ACB being poised to overturn gay marriage and such. To which I always ask "Why are you mad at the courts, and not the legislature? They could just pass a law allowing it, but they refuse." That usually leads to a glittery tantrum and accusations of being racist.

Are you a fan of the late but great Justice Antonin Scalia?

 
Looks as if Senate will meet Sunday, confirm Monday.

The Senate appears likely to confirm Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court as soon as next Monday, Oct. 26.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., had previously said that he anticipated beginning the process of considering the nomination of Barrett, currently a judge on the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, during a rare Friday session of the Senate.

McConnell is expected to file a cloture motion on the nomination on Friday, the day after the Barrett nomination is expected to be approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

That left the only real question of whether the cloture vote to limit debate would take place Sunday, which is the earliest possible time under Senate rules, or wait until Monday.

That cloture vote is now expected on Sunday, setting up for the confirmation vote as early as Monday and likely no later than Tuesday even if all 30 hours of post-cloture debate were to be consumed.
 
As a gay dude, I hear a lot of my fag pals getting all weepy about ACB being poised to overturn gay marriage and such. To which I always ask "Why are you mad at the courts, and not the legislature? They could just pass a law allowing it, but they refuse." That usually leads to a glittery tantrum and accusations of being racist.
The alternative (and proper) idea is to remove marriage from the federal courts and you know have people take the personal responsibility to fucking list shit out in their contact info and will.
 
Chuck Schumer said he is forcing a vote tonight to adjourn the Senate until after the November election.

Link / Archive

2020-10-19.png


Seems oddly coordinated with this half-assed 4-4 ruling. All but confirmed Roberts was bought out or the Dems have dirt they are blackmailing him with.
 
I wish Chucky would explain what makes the process so illegitimate. Seems to me that everything is exactly as intended.
Because Trump and millions of people are voting in this election (as usual). Either that or Trump is totally winning PA lol.
 
I wish Chucky would explain what makes the process so illegitimate. Seems to me that everything is exactly as intended.
He explained it throughout multiple tweets. I absolutely hate when don't choose to link related tweets together. Are his Twitter interns that incompetent?

Link 1 / Archive
Link 2 / Archive
Link 3 / Archive

I haven't watched the recent hearings so those who have can explain better. That said, he did try but failed at delaying the nomination process (Archive).

The reason why this is important is because Pennsylvania is the biggest battleground state next to Florida, but unlike Florida, it has a Democratic governor and Democratic-leaning state Supreme Court that ruled in favor of counting ballots (aka voting fraud) three days after the election. I still expect Barrett to be confirmed on Friday. The question is if Pennsylvanian Republicans can send it for appeal before Election Day. If not, we might be looking at a messy Supreme Court case to decide the issue of voting fraud in Pennsylvania and good god do I not want to wait weeks for the court to rule on this one issue.

Edit:
More whining about the so-called "illegitimate" process.

Link 1 / Archive
Link 2 / Archive
Link 3 / Archive

2020-10-19 (1).png

2020-10-19 (2).png

2020-10-19 (3).png
 
Last edited:
He explained it throughout multiple tweets. I absolutely hate when don't choose to link related tweets together. Are his Twitter interns that incompetent?

Link 1 / Archive
Link 2 / Archive
Link 3 / Archive

I haven't watched the recent hearings so those who have can explain better. That said, he did try but failed at delaying the nomination process (Archive).

The reason why this is important is because Pennsylvania is the biggest battleground state next to Florida, but unlike Florida, it has a Democratic governor and Democratic-leaning state Supreme Court that ruled in favor of counting ballots (aka voting fraud) three days after the election. I still expect Barrett to be confirmed on Friday. The question is if Pennsylvanian Republicans can send it for appeal before Election Day. If not, we might be looking at a messy Supreme Court case to decide the issue of voting fraud in Pennsylvania and good god do I not want to wait weeks for the court to rule on this one issue.
>The top reply for each tweet is asking about the Biden emails
>Half the replies are just people shitting on Schumer
 
>The top reply for each tweet is asking about the Biden emails
>Half the replies are just people shitting on Schumer
Actually didn't see any tweets shitting on Schumer but I didn't pay any particular attention to it either. But if that's what he (or rather his intern) is seeing, then he gets what he deserves.
 
What is stopping Trump from naming Barrett as an interim Justice untill the Senate reconvenes and votes on her confirmation should Chuck play that card?
 
What is stopping Trump from naming Barrett as an interim Justice untill the Senate reconvenes and votes on her confirmation should Chuck play that card?
Literally wasn't familiar with the president being able to do exactly that. Where does it say he can do that?
 
>The top reply for each tweet is asking about the Biden emails
>Half the replies are just people shitting on Schumer
I do wonder - are replies to popular accounts algorithmically customised like the Home feed is for each user? Is there any way of checking whether everyone sees the same set of "top" replies?
 
I do wonder - are replies to popular accounts algorithmically customised like the Home feed is for each user? Is there any way of checking whether everyone sees the same set of "top" replies?
I usually just read the archives, but I know Twitter is able to decide which replies can be first seen. Back when the Twitter admin accounts were leaked, there were screenshots showing that the admins had tools to manually set certain users as the first seen reply on specific tweets and accounts. I'm not sure there is an automated process for every account, but it does sound like it would be an interesting thing to investigate.
 
Literally wasn't familiar with the president being able to do exactly that. Where does it say he can do that?

Article II, Section 2, Clause III Grants the President the power to fill vacancies that occure durring a recess of the Senate. It was a topic back in 2016 as a back door for Garland.

"The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session."


"Could President Obama make a nominee during that recess? Only if the Senate is taking a recess lasting longer than three days, and does not come in from time to time during that recess to take some minimal legislative action. Both of those circumstances would be entirely within the Senate’s authority."
 
So did the vote succeed, or is Chucky just throwing another tantrum?
The vote did not succeed. Barrett is still on track to be confirmed next Monday.
Democrats fail in an effort to shut down Senate business in protest of the Barrett nomination, but vow to try again.
The Senate minority leader, Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, on Monday tried to shut down the Senate to delay movement on confirming Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.

The Senate minority leader, Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, on Monday tried to shut down the Senate to delay movement on confirming Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.Credit...Anna Moneymaker for The New York Times

Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, tried to shut down the Senate on Monday in protest of President Trump’s push to install Judge Amy Coney Barrett, his Supreme Court nominee, before Election Day.

Mr. Schumer called for the chamber to adjourn until after the November election, unless an elusive deal is reached on a stimulus measure to address the ongoing toll of the pandemic. His effort — a largely symbolic move designed to showcase the rush to confirm Judge Barrett — failed on a party-line vote, but it suggested that Democrats plan to use procedural tactics aimed at slowing or stopping the move in the days to come, spotlighting the rush to confirm her as they make their closing arguments to voters.

“We are not going to have business as usual here in the Senate,” Mr. Schumer said. “Their abuse of the Supreme Court process means we will not have business as usual — not now, not until Republicans stop their mad dash to confirm a Supreme Court justice mere days before a presidential election.”
The Judiciary Committee is scheduled on Thursday to approve the nomination of Judge Barrett, a constitutional originalist who personally opposes abortion rights and styles herself in the mold of the archconservative former justice, Antonin Scalia.

Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, planned to advance the nomination over the weekend in time for a final vote on Oct. 26, just over a week before the election.

Luke Broadwater
 
Back