Jump to content
GoDuBois.com
Sign in to follow this  
mr.d

Amy Coney Barrett Confirmed As Supreme Court Justice

SPONSOR:  

Recommended Posts

Amy Coney Barrett confirmed as Supreme Court justice in partisan vote


by LISA MASCARO | AP Congressional Correspondent

 
Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, meets with Sen. Martha McSally, R-Ariz., Wednesday, Oct. 21, 2020, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (Greg Nash/Pool via AP)
Facebook Share IconTwitter Share IconEmail Share Icon

WASHINGTON (AP) — Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed to the Supreme Court late Monday by a deeply divided Senate, Republicans overpowering Democrats to install President Donald Trump’s nominee days before the election and secure a likely conservative court majority for years to come.

\
 
Amy Coney Barrett confirmed as Supreme Court justice in partisan vote (CNN Newsource)

Trump's choice to fill the vacancy of the late liberal icon Ruth Bader Ginsburg potentially opens a new era of rulings on abortion, the Affordable Care Act and even his own election. Democrats were unable to stop the outcome, Trump's third justice on the court, as Republicans race to reshape the judiciary.

Volum
 
Justice Clarence Thomas swears in Amy Coney Barrett as a Supreme Court Justice. (CNN Newsource)

Barrett is 48, and her lifetime appointment as the 115th justice will solidify the court's rightward tilt.

 

“This is a momentous day for America,” Trump said at a primetime swearing-in event on the South Lawn at the White House.

Justice Clarence Thomas administered the Constitutional Oath to Barrett before a crowd of about 200. She will be able to participate in the court Tuesday after taking the judicial oath administered by Chief Justice John Roberts in a private ceremony at the court.

f1dcbfc7-6b83-48ff-8ec1-9ebdf0478348-med
President Donald Trump watches as Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas administers the Constitutional Oath to Amy Coney Barrett on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, Monday, Oct. 26, 2020, after Barrett was confirmed by the Senate earlier in the evening. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

Barrett told those gathered that she learned through the “rigorous confirmation” that “it is the job of a judge to resist her policy preferences.” She vowed, “I will do my job without any fear or favor.”

Monday's vote was the closest high court confirmation ever to a presidential election, and the first in modern times with no support from the minority party. The spiking COVID-19 crisis has hung over the proceedings. Vice President Mike Pence's office said Monday he would not preside at the Senate session unless his tie-breaking vote was needed after Democrats asked him to stay away when his aides tested positive for COVID-19. The vote was 52-48, and Pence's vote was not necessary.

“Voting to confirm this nominee should make every single senator proud,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, fending off “outlandish” criticism in a lengthy speech. During a rare weekend session he declared that Barrett's opponents “won’t be able to do much about this for a long time to come.”

 

5d53cb0c-8c3a-4379-8afb-7939d1ad7214-med
Senate confirms Amy Coney Barrett to Supreme Court (Photo: SBG)

Pence's presence presiding for the vote would have been expected, showcasing the Republican priority. But Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer and his leadership team said it would not only violate virus guidelines of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “it would also be a violation of common decency and courtesy.”

Underscoring the political divide during the pandemic, the Republican senators, most wearing masks, sat in their seats as is tradition for landmark votes, and applauded the outcome, with fist-bumps. Democratic senators were not present, heeding Schumer’s advice not to linger in the chamber. Some GOP senators tested positive for the coronavirus following a Rose Garden event with Trump to announce Barrett’s nomination last month, but have since returned from quarantine.

9fd691a0-a550-4231-9f01-57d93dc67342-med
President Donald Trump speaks before Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas administers the Constitutional Oath to Amy Coney Barrett on the South Lawn of the White House White House in Washington, Monday, Oct. 26, 2020, after Barrett was confirmed to be a Supreme Court justice by the Senate earlier in the evening. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Democrats argued for weeks that the vote was being improperly rushed and insisted during an all-night Sunday session it should be up to the winner of the Nov. 3 election to name the nominee. However, Barrett, a federal appeals court judge from Indiana, is expected to be seated swiftly, and begin hearing cases.

Speaking near midnight Sunday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., called the vote “illegitimate” and “the last gasp of a desperate party.”

 

Several matters are awaiting decision just a week before Election Day, and Barrett could be a decisive vote in Republican appeals of orders extending the deadlines for absentee ballots in North Carolina and Pennsylvania.

The justices also are weighing Trump’s emergency plea for the court to prevent the Manhattan District Attorney from acquiring his tax returns. And on Nov. 10, the court is expected to hear the Trump-backed challenge to the Obama-era Affordable Care Act. Just before the Senate vote began, the court sided with Republicans in refusing to extend the deadline for absentee ballots in Wisconsin.

24457765-72f8-46da-930d-42f7a25b0667-med
President Donald Trump watches as Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas administers the Constitutional Oath to Amy Coney Barrett on the South Lawn of the White House White House in Washington, Monday, Oct. 26, 2020, after Barrett was confirmed to be a Supreme Court justice by the Senate earlier in the evening. Holding the Bible is Barrett's husband, Jesse Barrett. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Trump has said he wanted to swiftly install a ninth justice to resolve election disputes and is hopeful the justices will end the health law known as “Obamacare.”

During several days of public testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Barrett was careful not to disclose how she would rule on any such cases.

She presented herself as a neutral arbiter and suggested, “It’s not the law of Amy.” But her writings against abortion and a ruling on “Obamacare” show a deeply conservative thinker.

0a5096ca-3d1e-4c7c-8cf2-636973ec0c07-med
Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Donald Trump's nominee for the Supreme Court, arrives for closed meetings with senators, at the Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, Oct. 21, 2020. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, praised the mother of seven as a role model for conservative women. “This is historic,” Graham said.

Republicans focused on her Catholic faith, criticizing earlier Democratic questions about her beliefs. Graham called Barrett “unabashedly pro-life.”

At the start of Trump’s presidency, McConnell engineered a Senate rules change to allow confirmation by a majority of the 100 senators, rather than the 60-vote threshold traditionally needed to advance high court nominees over objections. That was an escalation of a rules change Democrats put in place to advance other court and administrative nominees under President Barack Obama.

976dc162-8665-403b-903c-daef03506f55-med
People pray to Jesus at the door of the Supreme Court in support of Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, Monday, Oct. 26, 2020, outside the Supreme Court on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

Republicans are taking a political plunge days from the Nov. 3 election with the presidency and their Senate majority at stake.

Only one Republican — Sen. Susan Collins, who is in a tight reelection fight in Maine — voted against the nominee, not over any direct assessment of Barrett. Rather, Collins said, “I do not think it is fair nor consistent to have a Senate confirmation vote prior to the election.”

Trump and his Republican allies had hoped for a campaign boost, in much the way Trump generated excitement among conservatives and evangelical Christians in 2016 over a court vacancy. That year, McConnell refused to allow the Senate to consider then-President Barack Obama's choice to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia, arguing the new president should decide.

187bc10c-46a7-4d5b-a4c7-ea5e156bf723-med
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., leaves the chamber after a procedural vote to advance the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, at the Capitol in Washington, Sunday, Oct. 25, 2020. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Most other Republicans facing tough races embraced the nominee who clerked for the late Scalia to bolster their standing with conservatives. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said in a speech Monday that Barrett will “go down in history as one of the great justices.”

But it's not clear the extraordinary effort to install the new justice over such opposition in a heated election year will pay political rewards to the GOP.

Demonstrations for and against the nominee have been more muted at the Capitol under coronavirus restrictions.

98451e32-38de-474b-a0e5-a035bc62a3e1-med
A protester opposed to the Senate's race to confirm Amy Coney Barrett is removed by police after chaining themselves to a railing and holding a sign while sitting atop the statue Contemplation of Justice, at the Supreme Court building in Washington, Sunday, Oct. 25, 2020. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Democrats were unified against Barrett. While two Democratic senators voted to confirm Barrett in 2017 after Trump nominated the Notre Dame Law School professor to the appellate court, none voted to confirm her to the high court.

In a display of party priorities, California Sen. Kamala Harris, the vice presidential nominee, returned to Washington from the campaign trail to join colleagues with a no vote.

 

No other Supreme Court justice has been confirmed on a recorded vote with no support from the minority party in at least 150 years, according to information provided by the Senate Historical Office.                                                                                                                                                                                              SEE VIDEOS, PICTURES, TWEETS       ;       https://wjactv.com/news/nation-world/senate-set-to-confirm-amy-coney-barrett-to-supreme-court-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She is well qualified.

The problem was the purposeful "ramming" by the GOP..........sure to help continue the poor relations.

Barrett might have surprised the world by taking the courageous 'high road' and simply refused to be appointed until after the election. This would be painful for her since she would have risked a certain appointment, however much good would have resulted in this kind of heroic decision.......

Several reasons :  1. She would show that she will not be party to the low-life maneuvers of the GOP(or any other party) since 50 million have already cast their votes.......she might have shown she would honor the democratic process and wait to see what the people wanted---things have changed dramatically since 2016......

2. ... the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dying wish was that her seat on the court remain open until a new president was installed. At Barrett's nomination ceremony at the White House, she praised Justice Ginsburg as “a woman of enormous talent and consequence, whose life of public service serves as an example to us all.”  Her nomination just days after Ginsburg’s death was unseemly and a repudiation of her legacy. Given her admiration for Justice Ginsburg, she could have  repaired the injury to her memory by calling for a pause in the nomination until the next president is decided...

 

3. 

......Barrett's  nomination comes at a treacherous moment in the United States =  polarization, mistrust, and fevered conspiracy theories &  pandemics and economic suffering & violence in the streets ----This nomination, as she surely knows, will inflame our civic wounds, undermine confidence in the court, and deepen the divide among  citizens, especially if you are seated by a Republican Senate a week before the election of a Democratic president and congress. She had the opportunity to offer an alternative to all that by demanding that her nomination be suspended until after the election. 

Yeah---this would be asking a lot.  But there was much to be gained by risking her seat = earning the respect of fair-minded people everywhere;  being a model of civic selflessness (how much we need this now !!);  inspiring Americans and the world toward a commitment to the common good----imagine that in the Age of Trump !!?

 

We need heroes now more than ever........

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, conservativeman633 said:

She is well qualified.

The problem was the purposeful "ramming" by the GOP..........sure to help continue the poor relations.

Barrett might have surprised the world by taking the courageous 'high road' and simply refused to be appointed until after the election. This would be painful for her since she would have risked a certain appointment, however much good would have resulted in this kind of heroic decision.......

Several reasons :  1. She would show that she will not be party to the low-life maneuvers of the GOP(or any other party) since 50 million have already cast their votes.......she might have shown she would honor the democratic process and wait to see what the people wanted---things have changed dramatically since 2016......

2. ... the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dying wish was that her seat on the court remain open until a new president was installed. At Barrett's nomination ceremony at the White House, she praised Justice Ginsburg as “a woman of enormous talent and consequence, whose life of public service serves as an example to us all.”  Her nomination just days after Ginsburg’s death was unseemly and a repudiation of her legacy. Given her admiration for Justice Ginsburg, she could have  repaired the injury to her memory by calling for a pause in the nomination until the next president is decided...

 

3. 

......Barrett's  nomination comes at a treacherous moment in the United States =  polarization, mistrust, and fevered conspiracy theories &  pandemics and economic suffering & violence in the streets ----This nomination, as she surely knows, will inflame our civic wounds, undermine confidence in the court, and deepen the divide among  citizens, especially if you are seated by a Republican Senate a week before the election of a Democratic president and congress. She had the opportunity to offer an alternative to all that by demanding that her nomination be suspended until after the election. 

Yeah---this would be asking a lot.  But there was much to be gained by risking her seat = earning the respect of fair-minded people everywhere;  being a model of civic selflessness (how much we need this now !!);  inspiring Americans and the world toward a commitment to the common good----imagine that in the Age of Trump !!?

 

We need heroes now more than ever........

 

 

Wrong again...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She is absolutely qualified. The democratic process took place as designed. The only problem was that infantile Democrats threw their fits and refused to participate, instead going to great lengths to tarnish a good persons name. 
RBG was an astounding person. There is no doubt about that. With that being said, who gives a damn what her “dying wish” was? Assuming she actually said that since her daughter was the only one to hear it. Would Democrats be so butt hurt if a Democratic Senator died and his or her last wish was for their seat to not be filled until the next election; but instead it was filled in a special election? That would be a hard no. 
The seating of a democratic President? Fiction can be fun. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, conservativeman633 said:

She is well qualified.

The problem was the purposeful "ramming" by the GOP..........sure to help continue the poor relations.

Barrett might have surprised the world by taking the courageous 'high road' and simply refused to be appointed until after the election. This would be painful for her since she would have risked a certain appointment, however much good would have resulted in this kind of heroic decision.......

Several reasons :  1. She would show that she will not be party to the low-life maneuvers of the GOP(or any other party) since 50 million have already cast their votes.......she might have shown she would honor the democratic process and wait to see what the people wanted---things have changed dramatically since 2016......

2. ... the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dying wish was that her seat on the court remain open until a new president was installed. At Barrett's nomination ceremony at the White House, she praised Justice Ginsburg as “a woman of enormous talent and consequence, whose life of public service serves as an example to us all.”  Her nomination just days after Ginsburg’s death was unseemly and a repudiation of her legacy. Given her admiration for Justice Ginsburg, she could have  repaired the injury to her memory by calling for a pause in the nomination until the next president is decided...

 

3. 

......Barrett's  nomination comes at a treacherous moment in the United States =  polarization, mistrust, and fevered conspiracy theories &  pandemics and economic suffering & violence in the streets ----This nomination, as she surely knows, will inflame our civic wounds, undermine confidence in the court, and deepen the divide among  citizens, especially if you are seated by a Republican Senate a week before the election of a Democratic president and congress. She had the opportunity to offer an alternative to all that by demanding that her nomination be suspended until after the election. 

Yeah---this would be asking a lot.  But there was much to be gained by risking her seat = earning the respect of fair-minded people everywhere;  being a model of civic selflessness (how much we need this now !!);  inspiring Americans and the world toward a commitment to the common good----imagine that in the Age of Trump !!?

 

We need heroes now more than ever........

 

 

The very least you could do is give the people who wrote this credit for their thoughts instead of making a few cuts then implying it as your own.

I wonder why BobRx didn't sign this?

An Open Letter to Judge Amy Coney Barrett From Your Notre Dame Colleagues

October 10, 2020

Dear Judge Barrett,

We write to you as fellow faculty members at the University of Notre Dame.

We congratulate you on your nomination to the United States Supreme Court. An appointment to the Court is the crowning achievement of a legal career and speaks to the commitments you have made throughout your life. And while we are not pundits, from what we read your confirmation is all but assured.

That is why it is vital that you issue a public statement calling for a halt to your nomination process until after the November presidential election.

We ask that you take this unprecedented step for three reasons.

First, voting for the next president is already underway. According to the United States Election Project (https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/index.html), more than seven million people have already cast their ballots, and millions more are likely to vote before election day. The rushed nature of your nomination process, which you certainly recognize as an exercise in raw power politics, may effectively deprive the American people of a voice in selecting the next Supreme Court justice. You are not, of course, responsible for the anti-democratic machinations driving your nomination. Nor are you complicit in the Republican hypocrisy of fast-tracking your nomination weeks before a presidential election when many of the same senators refused to grant Merrick Garland so much as a hearing a full year before the last election. However, you can refuse to be party to such maneuvers. We ask that you honor the democratic process and insist the hearings be put on hold until after the voters have made their choice. Following the election, your nomination would proceed, or not, in accordance with the wishes of the winning candidate. 

Next, the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dying wish was that her seat on the court remain open until a new president was installed. At your nomination ceremony at the White House, you praised Justice Ginsburg as “a woman of enormous talent and consequence, whose life of public service serves as an example to us all.” Your nomination just days after Ginsburg’s death was unseemly and a repudiation of her legacy. Given your admiration for Justice Ginsburg, we ask that you repair the injury to her memory by calling for a pause in the nomination until the next president is seated.

Finally, your nomination comes at a treacherous moment in the United States. Our politics are consumed by polarization, mistrust, and fevered conspiracy theories. Our country is shaken by pandemic and economic suffering. There is violence in the streets of American cities. The politics of your nomination, as you surely understand, will further inflame our civic wounds, undermine confidence in the court, and deepen the divide among ordinary citizens, especially if you are seated by a Republican Senate weeks before the election of a Democratic president and congress. You have the opportunity to offer an alternative to all that by demanding that your nomination be suspended until after the election. We implore you to take that step.

We’re asking a lot, we know. Should Vice-President Biden be elected, your seat on the court will almost certainly be lost. That would be painful, surely. Yet there is much to be gained in risking your seat. You would earn the respect of fair-minded people everywhere. You would provide a model of civic selflessness. And you might well inspire Americans of different beliefs toward a renewed commitment to the common good.

We wish you well and trust you will make the right decision for our nation.

Yours in Notre Dame,

John Duffy, English  

Douglass Cassel, Emeritus, Law School

Barbara J, Fick, Emerita, Law School

Fernand N. Dutile, Professor of Law Emeritus

Joseph Bauer, Emeritus, Law School

Jimmy Gurulé, Professor of Law.  

Thomas Kselman, Emeritus, History

Catherine E. Bolten, Anthropology and Peace Studies

Karen Graubart, History and Gender Studies

Margaret Dobrowolska, Physics

Aedín Clements, Hesburgh Libraries

Cheri Smith, Hesburgh Libraries

Antonio Delgado, Physics

Atalia Omer, Peace Studies

Eileen Hunt Botting, Political Science

Jason A. Springs, Peace Studies

David Hachen, Sociology

Manoel Couder, Physics

Jacek Furdyna, Physics

Carmen Helena Tellez, Music

Kristin Shrader-Frechette, Biological Sciences, Philosophy

John T. Fitzgerald, Theology

Debra Javeline, Political Science 

Philippe Collon, Physics

Cara Ocobock, Anthropology

Amy Mulligan, Irish, Medieval Studies and Gender Studies

Stephen M. Fallon, Program of Liberal Studies and Dept of English

Jessica Shumake, University Writing Program and Gender Studies

Mandy L. Havert, Hesburgh Libraries

Dana Villa, Political Science

Stephen M. Hayes, Emeritus, Hesburgh Libraries

Catherine Perry, Emerita, Romance Languages & Literatures

Olivier Morel, Film, Television, and Theatre.

Darlene Catello, Music

Encarnación Juárez-Almendros, Emerita, Romance Languages & Literatures

James Sterba, Philosophy

Laura Bayard, Emerita, Hesburgh Libraries

Susan Sheridan, Anthropology

Mary E. Frandsen, Music

Mark Golitko, Anthropology

Christopher Ball, Anthropology

Gail Bederman, History

G. Margaret Porter, Emerita, Hesburgh Libraries

Cecilia Lucero, Center for University Advising

Peri E. Arnold, Emeritus, Political Science

Amitava Krishna Dutt, Political Science

Julia Marvin, Program of Liberal Studies

Julia Adeney Thomas, History

Michael C. Brownstein, East Asian Languages & Cultures

Christopher Liebtag Miller, Medieval Institute

Maxwell Johnson, Theology

John Sitter, Emeritus, English

Robert Norton, German

Hye-jin Juhn, Hesburgh Libraries

Denise M. Della Rossa, German

Sotirios A. Barber, Political Science

Pamela Robertson Wojcik, Film, TV and Theatre

Jeff Diller, Mathematics

Ann Mische, Sociology and Peace Studies

Zygmunt Baranski, Romance Languages & Literatures

Robert R. Coleman, Emeritus, Art History

William Collins Donahue, German, FTT, & Keough

Sarah McKibben, Irish Language and Literature

George A. Lopez, emeritus, Kroc Institute

Mark Roche, German

Nelson Mark, Economics

Vittorio Hosle, German, Philosophy and Political Science

Tobias Boes, German 

A. Nilesh Fernando, Economics

Fred Dallmayr, Emeritus, Philosophy and Political Science

Greg Kucich, English

Kate Marshall, English

Mark A. Sanders, English

Christopher Hamlin, History

Meredith S. Chesson, Anthropology

Ricardo Ramirez, Political Science

Stephen Fredman, Emeritus, English

Dan Graff, History and the Higgins Labor Program

Henry Weinfield, Program of Liberal Studies (Emeritus)

Mary R. D’Angelo, Theology (Emerita)

Asher Kaufman, Kroc Institute, History

Stephen J. Miller, Music

Janet A. Kourany, Philosophy and Gender Studies

Michelle Karnes, English

Jill Godmilow, Emerita, Film, Television & Theatre

Mary Beckman, Emerita, Center for Social Concerns

Clark Power, Program of Liberal Studies

Richard Williams, Sociology

Benedict Giamo, Emeritus, American Studies

Ernesto Verdeja, Political Science and Peace Studies 

Catherine Schlegel, Classics

Margaret A. Doody, English, Professor Emerita 

Marie Collins Donahue, Eck Institute of Global Health

 David C. Leege, Emeritus, Political Science

Xavier Creary, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry (Emeritus)
 
Romana Huk, PhD, English
 
Joseph M. Parent, Professor of Political Science
 
Mary Celeste Kearney, Film, Television, and Theatre, and Gender Studies
 
Richard Sheehan, Ph.D., Department of Finance, Mendoza College of Business
 
Marty Wolfson, Emeritus, Economics
 
Michael Kackman, PhD, Department of Film, Television, and Theatre
 
Ann Marie Power, PhD, Sociology
 
Or why you didn't post, or take credit, for this...
 

Statement from Rev. John I. Jenkins, C.S.C., on Justice Amy Coney Barrett

On behalf of the University of Notre Dame, I congratulate Amy Coney Barrett on her confirmation today by the United States Senate as a justice of the United States Supreme Court. Recognized by experts from across the spectrum of judicial philosophies as a superb legal scholar and judge, she is an esteemed colleague and a teacher revered by her students. Justice Barrett becomes the first alumna of Notre Dame Law School and the first Notre Dame faculty member to be so honored. We join her family and friends in celebrating this momentous achievement, and we assure Justice Barrett and all her colleagues on the nation’s highest court of our continued prayers in their work of administering justice and upholding the Constitution.


"Be still, my fingers, be still" - fedup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, conservativeman633 said:

She is well qualified.

The problem was the purposeful "ramming" by the GOP..........sure to help continue the poor relations.

Barrett might have surprised the world by taking the courageous 'high road' and simply refused to be appointed until after the election. This would be painful for her since she would have risked a certain appointment, however much good would have resulted in this kind of heroic decision.......

Several reasons :  1. She would show that she will not be party to the low-life maneuvers of the GOP(or any other party) since 50 million have already cast their votes.......she might have shown she would honor the democratic process and wait to see what the people wanted---things have changed dramatically since 2016......

2. ... the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dying wish was that her seat on the court remain open until a new president was installed. At Barrett's nomination ceremony at the White House, she praised Justice Ginsburg as “a woman of enormous talent and consequence, whose life of public service serves as an example to us all.”  Her nomination just days after Ginsburg’s death was unseemly and a repudiation of her legacy. Given her admiration for Justice Ginsburg, she could have  repaired the injury to her memory by calling for a pause in the nomination until the next president is decided...

 

3. 

......Barrett's  nomination comes at a treacherous moment in the United States =  polarization, mistrust, and fevered conspiracy theories &  pandemics and economic suffering & violence in the streets ----This nomination, as she surely knows, will inflame our civic wounds, undermine confidence in the court, and deepen the divide among  citizens, especially if you are seated by a Republican Senate a week before the election of a Democratic president and congress. She had the opportunity to offer an alternative to all that by demanding that her nomination be suspended until after the election. 

Yeah---this would be asking a lot.  But there was much to be gained by risking her seat = earning the respect of fair-minded people everywhere;  being a model of civic selflessness (how much we need this now !!);  inspiring Americans and the world toward a commitment to the common good----imagine that in the Age of Trump !!?

 

We need heroes now more than ever........

 

 

So any decisions that would have been handed down over the next three months aren't important?   

There is nothing that says that RBG's "supposed "dying wish" A) Actually happened and B) was valid--it wasn't law. 

RBG in 2016, " Senators refusing to vote on President Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court should recognize that a president is elected for four years not three."  They gambled and they lost. 

If your team has the ball, and there is still time on the clock you keep playing. 

A "scathing" letter by college professors?  Please.  The most liberal people to breathe are college professors who are indoctrinating your progeny with their own ideas instead of teaching them to think.  Why is "you need to go to college" beaten into the heads of children everywhere?  Many of the most successful people I know did not go to college.  And some of the ones that did go are not even close to working in their field of study--a marine biologist working as a bank manager?  And have you seen some of the course offerings???  And some of the majors??  You can get a degree in BAGPIPING from Carnegie Mellon--average cost of a degree at Carnegie Mellon: $76,874 per year--before aid.  Those professors are a huge part of the problem in the US. 

I have some dem friends that are mad that she was the nominee because it goes completely against the "Orange man hates women" they have been attempting to try to swing the female vote--and I'm not dumb enough to believe that Harris was chosen because she is the most qualified democrat to be Biden's running mate, and possible Vice President of the United States.  She was chosen because she is a "black female" period--by the party that says all races and genders are equal.  Baloney--we the people are being played.   

ACB was an excellent choice.  We should all be proud. 


"A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse." - Thomas Jefferson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, conservativeman633 said:

2. ... the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dying wish was that her seat on the court remain open until a new president was installed. 

She should have stepped down 4.5 years ago and Obama would have installed his choice.  She didn't and Trump got to make that decision.  Selfish.  Of all the people, she would of known that a "wish" as this was not backed by the law.  Arrogance.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We all know that if the shoe was on the other foot, and a Democrat was the current President, they would not have waited until the election to swear in a new judge.  And that, folks, is the honest truth!  Don't doubt it for one second!


Every day is a gift from God; that's why we call it the "present!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jeff said:

Plus now you have Democrat politicians that have been in office for 30-40 years saying it may be time for term limits for Justices. I can go for that, if we can also have term limits on politicians as well...

Agreed.  Although I also think that age requirements, and health considerations should be considered.  There is no reason that an 87 year old pancreatic cancer patient should have been allowed to retain her seat.  (Believe it or not, I say that with respect for her role and he position--but she was a chess piece at that point.) They were gambling she'd survive until Biden took office and could replace her with who they wanted--and it failed.  She should have resigned when Obama was president so that she could have been replaced by a liberal  leaning appointee if that is what they really wanted.  Sometimes when you gamble you lose. 

Likely this appointment to the SCOTUS is more important than who sits in the Oval Office for the next four years. 


"A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse." - Thomas Jefferson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The next time the American people give Democrats a majority in this chamber, you will have forfeited the right to tell us how to run that majority." "My colleagues may regret this for a lot longer than they think," --Chuck Schumer

This is the second threat Schumer has made regarding the Supreme Court...Schumer had to apologize for the first one.


1) "Take off is optional....landing is mandatory"

2)  The secret to a long life is you try not to shorten it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, disgruntled said:

Agreed.  Although I also think that age requirements, and health considerations should be considered.  There is no reason that an 87 year old pancreatic cancer patient should have been allowed to retain her seat.  (Believe it or not, I say that with respect for her role and he position--but she was a chess piece at that point.) They were gambling she'd survive until Biden took office and could replace her with who they wanted--and it failed.  She should have resigned when Obama was president so that she could have been replaced by a liberal  leaning appointee if that is what they really wanted.  Sometimes when you gamble you lose. 

Likely this appointment to the SCOTUS is more important than who sits in the Oval Office for the next four years. 

Definitely believe that this is more important than any position whether it be the WH, the House or the Senate. Because this is the group that is supposed to KNOW and RULE by the constitution and laws of the land, but sadly they too have become infected by political leanings which is not right. A position on the SCOTUS should be based on that person's knowledge and history of following those the Constitution and laws when making their decisions, and from what I have seen and know about this person she most definitely meets those qualifications IMO. When I hear the Democrats say that they will increase the number of justices, plus lets not forget THEY did threaten them not all that long ago as well, it only proves to me that it is THEM (Democrats) that want to have a corrupt SCOTUS so that they can push though EVERYTHING they want. As I have been told my whole life actions speak louder than words, and it is so true with the Democrats for the past at least 12 years.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would anyone in their right mind turn down an opportunity like this. Only a deranged person would think that..oh yah we are talking about you so...she has more talent and brains than you ever will. Isn't that what you always tell us about anyone on Congress? Well it is true with her and she will be great. Excellent choice on Trumps part. You can go cry in your corner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, conservativeman633 said:

We need heroes---Barrett had her chance to be one by delaying the nomination.  Chance lost.

Dont worry your squad members Ocasio Cortez and Tlaib had a presser. They will take care of that(Packing) and and fracking(No). They are going to push Biden.  probably right out of office. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, conservativeman633 said:

Thou succumbs to trump's scare tactics far too easily

Nice diversion from the Squad press conference. I wont waste my time posting the video. to make to you look like a fool again. But hence, you may get your socialism. Today is the 2 year anniversary of you winning anything. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lyndsey33 said:

Why would anyone in their right mind turn down an opportunity like this. Only a deranged person would think that..oh yah we are talking about you so....

It would not be easy to do, but that is what being heroic is all about.   Many Americans have given up far more than that to help the nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  


×
×
  • Create New...