By John Ubaldi, “Ubaldi Reports”
With the presidential election just weeks away the Supreme Court has become a defining moment with the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the selection of Amy Coney Barrett.
With President Trump selecting Barrett as Ginsburg’s replacement, unlike previous Democratic nominees to the Supreme Court, Republican nominees always face undue questioning regarding their selection.
Republican nominees always are castigated as their appointment will set the nation back decades.
Long term Democrat Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy stated, that Barrett’s nomination will be a disaster for individual rights if she is confirmed to the court.
“They’re scared that the clock would be turned back to a time when women had no right to control their own bodies. And when it was acceptable to discriminate against women in the workplace,” Leahy said. “They’re scared that at a time when we’re facing the perilous impacts of climate change, bedrock environmental protections are going to be eviscerated. And they’re scared that your confirmation will result in the rolling back of voting rights, workers’ rights, and the rights of the LGBTQ community to equal treatment.”
Even vice presidential candidate Senator Kamala Harris stated via a tweet, “Here is what’s at stake with this Supreme Court nomination: Voting rights. Workers’ rights. Consumers’ rights. Safe and legal abortion. And so much more. We must listen to the American people and confirm a new justice after voters decide who they want in the White House.”
Does Leahy realize that Barrett is a working mother of seven children! Barrett would know more about what it is like to be working mother then Leahy or for that matter Harris.
Before and during the hearings, Democrats expressed outrage that Barrett’s nomination will set the nation back decades especially as it relates to the Affordable Care Act and Abortion rights.
These two issues are litmus tests for all Republican nominees, but especially for Democrats who revere the landmark Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade which legalized abortion.
At the opening of the hearings for Barrett, Leahy stated, “At the top of their hit list is the Affordable Care Act. It is no secret, and it is no coincidence, that Republicans are rushing to confirm Judge Barrett before the Supreme Court considers the latest Republican-led lawsuit to overturn the Affordable Care Act on November 10. The President has promised that any judge he nominates will overturn the Affordable Care Act. For her part, Judge Barrett’s writings have made it unequivocally clear that she believes the law is unconstitutional.”
Every time a Republican president nominates someone to the Supreme Court the Democratic Party sounds the alarm that the sky will fall if that person is confirmed to the court. Democrats always want precise answers on how the nominee will rule, a standard they never ask or expect from a Democratic nominee.
Ever since Roe v. Wade the landmark abortion rights case affirmed by the Supreme Court in 1973, every Republican nominee has faced and been asked if they would strike down this landmark case. Even after many Republican Supreme Court nominees who have been confirmed have not reversed the Roe v. Wade decision, but Democrats still pursue this line of questioning.
Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, said of Democratic arguments against Barrett include that, “she’s going to be an activist … justice and go in there and change the law. She’s not. and we all know that. This is simply the tired and worn-out argument that is made every time a Republican president nominates a candidate… for the Supreme Court of the United States. And it’s never been true and it will not be true with Judge Barrett.”
Everything seems preordained and Democrats want assurances that Barrett would not overturn ACA. Constitutional Law Professor at George Washington University Jonathan Turley, twitted, “Sen. Booker just said that President Trump was wrong to pick someone who would overturn the ACA. Yet, he just said we should wait because the voters do not want someone who may overturn the ACA. That sounds like picking a jurist who would simply make the opposite pledge.”
Turley continued, “Sen. Booker just declared (before hearing from the nominee) that he will not vote for Barrett. His vote will be unburdened by actual answers by the nominee, but he is demanding assurances that a nominee will support the ACA.”
No legitimate nominee to the high court would ever give such assurances. Instead of asking serious questions regarding constitutional philosophy, Democratic senators focused entirely on how Barrett would rule on a topic, which would be impossible to ascertain without knowledge of the case.
This line of questioning by Democrats is never asked of Democratic Supreme Court nominees, but they always expect Republican nominees to talk about it.
Turley again mentioned that, “Ironically, it would be precisely the type of pledge that Ruth Bader Ginsburg refused to make on cases when she established the “Ginsburg Rule.” She considered it improper and unethical to demand concessions or promises from a nominee.”
Democratic California Senator Dianne Feinstein mentioned that in the confirmation hearing for Ginsburg, she stated that the constitution does in fact permit abortion. This negates the “Ginsburg Rule.” Barrett reminded Feinstein that Justice Elena Kagan refused to answer the same question, instead stating she would not give “a thumbs up or thumbs down” on abortion cases. Democrats accepted this answer but refused Barrett’s similar answer.
The confirmation process is severely flawed, instead of focusing on constitutional philosophy, the process has now divulged into theatrics with its only aim to score cheap political points.