Via Black Republican:
Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s name has popped up each time President Trump has had to pick a new Supreme Court nominee, and there is once again buzz about Coney Barrett since Trump may choose to nominate a replacement for the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Coney Barrett, 48, has been on Trump’s list of potential nominees since 2017. Picking her would keep the male-female ratio on the Court the same, although it would throw off the balance of liberals and conservatives among the justices.
I like her. Only question: can you start next Monday?
In one of the three videos I posted about Barrett yesterday, one of them is a presentation she gave to a group of lawyers and non-lawyers at the University of (I think) Kentucky, in which she explained what is really meant within the law as “conservative” and “liberal” as it regards the courts. It boils down to either, as she put it, an “expansive” or “originalist” interpretation of the Constitution and I hadn’t had it explained this specifically, but there are indeed times when an “expansive” opinion is peferrable to a more “strict” interpretation. It is counterintuitive to our thinking.
However, when the pols get involved with the courts, you can pretty much count on both sides choosing people whose “values” align with partisan politics, having nothing to do with the interpretation of the Constitution. The Left has taken this to the extreme, though, by nominating people whose political ideology is more important to them than what is traditionally considered to be either an expansive or an originalist view of the Constitution. In other words, the Left is now openly choosing people who are “activist” lawyers/judges who will operate completely outside the Constitution in ways that were never anticipated or intended by the Founders. And they have the power to get away with it. The only thing staying the hands of Sotomeyor and Kagan from revealing this side of things in the SCOTUS, are the more conservative justices on the court. But if that balance is tipped by the Democrats, we’ll be seeing more and more of it. All those bad lower court decisions that were struck down by the SCOTUS during obama’s reign would probably be upheld under a Progressive court.
I can’t remember who said it, but the Supreme Court was the last pillar of our three part system of gov’t on which the two parties can no longer have a rational debate. The situation is all-out, bare-knuckled brawling now and a fight for the preservation of our country.
She bends her knee to Rome:
https://humanevents.com/2019/09/19/amy-coney-barrett-is-not-a-safe-pick-for-the-supreme-court/
No thanks, I prefer an originalist.
What we really need is smaller government, that’s the best way to reduce the impact of SCOTUS for either side.
Precisely why we need Trump – and then a continuation of Coolidge-types after him.
ACB was confirmed in 2017 to sit on the Seventh Circuit District Court of Appeals. No scandals were found then so the dems will have to make up some if she is the nominee.
I like Judge Amy Coney Barrett. It doesn’t bother me that she is a devout Roman Catholic. What does concern me though is her membership in the People of Praise. This is going to be described as a religious cult by her opponents, and there will be more scrutiny about her religious beliefs than if she was not involved in this ultra-conservative, lay ministry of the Catholic Church. This will add fuel to a firestorm. If Judge Barrett is Trump’s Nominee, Kalamity Harris will be Front and center during the confirmation hearings, and the country will get a a close look at her Kalamitous behavior, since she won’t pass up the opportunity to upstage the other Senators.
As Spock would say, “The dogma is strong in you!”.
Actually – it was a NoCal girl that said that . I kid you not!
NOt Nancy.
Get the process going, now, to drive the media-cycle and so Americans can see the Dem/Left Hate-Machine assault a successful woman and mother who shares their values.
Should completely circumvent the whole MeToo/sex assault accusation routine. Although, there are probably a lot of men who would have liked being sexually assaulted by Judge Barrett…
Odin perhaps the article is true but Human Events is a mag geared to those of the Jewish faith. Everyone has an angle. Relax
Nope. She’s a female Roberts. President Trump is awesome, but let’s face it, he’s a centrist,not a solid conservative.
He gravitates towards liberal judges. There won’t be any Scalia type judges on the Supreme Court under his administration – only by some miracle will that happen.
Since liberal interpretation of the Constitution seems to mean something completely different than what the rest of us believe it means, I welcome another reality-based justice.
I prefer Jeanine Pirro.
If only Candace Owens had the requisite legal credentials.
Squad Leader
Pleas give some links.
thanks
Robert Barnes really, REALLY does not wat ACB on the supremes. Says she is a corporatist, and ruled in favor of Michigan governor. But then Barnes is anti-Catholic, for what it’s worth.
CLARENCE THOMAS
Don’t you think it’s about time to step aside (72 years old) and make way for a younger Conservative while Trump is in office? You’ll be 76 when he finishes in Jan. 2025. Are you going to be around for the next Republican president?
Probably not. Head out of town now, 72 is the right age to retire, go leave a legacy.