Amy Coney Barrett

Joe Biden’s racist civil rights nominee, Part Five

Featured image Last night, I wrote about Lani Guinier, Bill Clinton’s nominee to head the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division. Clinton withdrew her nomination because, in essence, she advocated voting and legislative practices that were not race-neutral. I compared Guinier with Kristen Clarke, Joe Biden’s nominee for the same position, and found Clarke to be more extreme than Guinier. I also pointed out that, unlike Clarke, Guinier was a good-faith advocate for the »

Supreme Court set to uphold Obamacare

Featured image During the hearings on the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee pretended that confirming Barrett would jeopardize Obamacare. To support this claim, they noted that the Supreme Court soon would be hearing a challenge to that law and they pointed to a law review article by Barrett that criticized Chief Justice Roberts’ reasoning when he upheld Obamacare in 2012. The Dems’ argument was always phony. »

The Supreme Court now

Featured image What is the shape of the Supreme Court now that Amy Coney Barrett is a member? Three articles consider the question. Jason Richwine argues that the new court is best viewed, not as one in which Justice Barrett has replaced Justice Ginsburg, but as one in which Justice Kavanaugh has replaced Chief Justice Roberts as the key vote. I agree. Assuming no court packing, the question then becomes how much »

Despite Democrats’ hysteria, public favored Amy Barrett’s confirmation

Featured image Democrats want to portray the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett as a raw power play that was antithetical to our democracy. Yet, public opinion polls tell us that, had Justice Barrett’s nomination been put to a vote by the American people, she would have been confirmed by a margin comparable to or greater than the one provided by the Senate. The Senate confirmed Barrett by a vote of 52-48. A »

Justice Barrett!

Featured image It’s all done. She’s Justice Barrett now. As Paul has already noted, Democrats have themselves to blame in their expedient decision under Harry Reid to eliminate the filibuster for appellate court nominees—a move determined by entirely short-term considerations of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals that kept blocking overreaching executive branch initiatives from President Obama. I wonder if this bitter experience will give Democrats pause about abolishing the legislative filibuster »

Chuck Schumer reaps what he sowed

Featured image The Senate has voted to confirm Amy Coney Barrett as a Supreme Court Justice. She will be sworn in tonight, probably around the time I finish writing this post. It’s remarkable to me how quickly Mitch McConnell was able to drive this nomination through. I’m also surprised that only one Republican Senator (the embattled Susan Collins) voted against confirming Judge Barrett. President Trump is said by some to be a »

Today is the day

Featured image Judge Amy Coney Barrett is to be confirmed as an associate justice of the Supreme Court later today. We support her confirmation. We think she will make a great contribution to the Court. President Trump himself has made a great contribution to the federal judiciary with the quality of his nominations to the bench. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell — I would like to say our beloved Cocaine Mitch — »

Hamlet of the far north will vote to confirm Judge Barrett

Featured image Lisa Murkowski has announced that she will vote in favor of confirming Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. It now appears that Susan Collins will be the only Republican Senator not to support Barrett’s confirmation. Initially, Murkowski was opposed to confirming Barrett. Her gripe, she said, was with the process. That is, she opposed confirming a Supreme Court Justice, no matter how well qualified, in a presidential election year »

Republicans looking to confirm Judge Barrett on or around Oct. 26

Featured image The Hill reports that Senate Republicans are eyeing a final vote to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court on Monday, October 26 — less than a week from today. That timeline isn’t locked down, but Republicans are planning a rare weekend session that would set up a final vote early next week. My initial take was that Barrett probably wouldn’t be confirmed before the election (and probably »

Chuck Schumer: Dems will deny GOP a quorum to advance Barrett

Featured image Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer says that Democrats will not supply a quorum with which to advance the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. Schumer defended this move, saying that Barrett’s nomination is “illegitimate, dangerous and unpopular.” There’s no point debating Schumer on these partisan claims. The question is whether the Democrats can block Barrett’s nomination through this ploy. I don’t think they can. A quorum in »

Even the Washington Post can’t deny that Barrett was a hit

Featured image You can tell from this Washington Post article that Amy Coney Barrett sailed through her confirmation hearings in fine form. The Post is forced to acknowledge that Barrett was a hit among Catholic women. Thus, it falls back on attacking President Trump and GOP Senators for using Barrett for political purposes. The Post didn’t survey Catholic women for its article. It handpicked a few of them. Two are professors. Another, »

Speech police alert: Judge Barrett said “sexual preference.” But so did Biden and Ginsburg [UPDATED]

Featured image Yesterday, Sen. Mazie Hirono (Moron-Hawaii) chastised Judge Amy Coney Barrett for using the term “sexual preference.” Judge Barrett uttered these words while discussing Justice Scalia’s dissent in the case that legalized same-sex marriage. Hirono intoned: Not once, but twice you used the term “sexual preference” to describe those in the LGBTQ community. And let me make clear, “sexual preference” is an offensive and outdated term. It is used by the »

When is it okay to prevent a woman from speaking?

Featured image After Kamala Harris’ debate with Mike Pence, some female pundits couldn’t contain their glee that Harris had told Pence, on the few occasions when he interrupted her, “I’m speaking.” They saw this as the defining moment of the debate (or claimed to). I wonder how these same female pundits evaluated today’s spectacle of a distinguished female nominee for the Supreme Court being treated as a bystander at her confirmation hearing, »

Dick Durbin’s not so beautiful mind

Featured image In a post below, I complained about how, instead of questioning Amy Coney Barrett, Senators are using her as a prop while they make speeches. Not surprisingly, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, a world class grandstander, was the biggest culprit during three hours or so of the hearing that I watched. Sen. Dick Durbin did a fair amount of speechifying, too. Much of it was directed, not at the issue of whether »

Sheldon Whitehouse’s not so beautiful mind

Featured image I skipped yesterday’s hearing on the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. I didn’t want to waste a day listening to speeches by Judiciary Committee members. In theory, today’s hearing is devoted to questions for Judge Barrett. Yet, in the nearly three hours of the hearing I watched, there wasn’t much questioning. Mostly, there was speechifying. If I’m not mistaken, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse devoted all of »

Democrats attack Judge Barrett with bogus talking point

Featured image Hearings on the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court began this morning. It’s my understanding that today’s hearing was devoted to speeches. I didn’t have the stomach to listen to them. A reader who listened to the first few speeches writes: I’m watching the “hearing” about Judge Barrett’s nomination. Senator Leahy is now describing how “Vermonters” are “scared” that Judge Barrett’s nomination will mean that Vermonters »

Barrett confirmation likely to proceed as planned, no thanks to White House announcement event

Featured image Democrats are calling for a delay in the confirmation hearing of Amy Coney Barrett on the grounds that two members of the Senate Judiciary Committee — Mike Lee and Thom Tillis — have tested positive for the Wuhan coronavirus. This tactic comes as no surprise. I’m pretty sure that if roles were reversed, Republicans would be calling for delay on the same grounds. I don’t think there is any need »