Amy Coney Barrett CONFIRMED to the U.S. Supreme Court

[the next guy]

Ginsburg's reputation should take a hit for this.

 

[StatUS]

Absolute failure by the Dems.

 

[tofuspeedstar]

Is there a solution?

Yes. Limit the terms of justices to 18 years instead of lifetime appointments.

Stagger it to where a justice retires in every 1st/3rd year of a President's term so we don't have this mess again. This way every President gets to appoint at least 2 justices during their time in office (4 if they serve a second term).

If a justice dies in the middle of their term, president has the power (with confirmation) to appoint another to finish out the remainder of the deceased justice's term, however, upon the end of their term they would not be eligible for reappointment.

 

[voltronblack]

Chief Justice John Roberts broke with the four other conservative justices and joined with the court’s three liberals on Monday in denying a request by Republicans seeking to block a state court’s ruling that extended the deadline for the delivery of mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania by three days.

That produced a 4-4 vote on the court - down a justice following the September death of liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg - yielding a deadlock that preserved the lower court’s ruling.

There has been an upswing in voting by mail due to the coronavirus pandemic. Democrats said that if Barrett already were on the court she would have voted in favor of the Republican bid to block the extension in Pennsylvania, a state crucial to Trump’s re-election chances.

The Pennsylvania case, Democratic Senator dikk Durbin said during a call with reporters, “was a disturbing demonstration of what’s at stake if the Republicans have their way and fill this vacancy.”

“With one more vote they would have succeeded,” Durbin said. “That’s exactly the kind of judicial activism Republicans claim to oppose. ... It’s exactly the kind of judicial activism they are expecting from Judge Barrett as they rush to confirm her.”

Trump has asked the Republican-led Senate to confirm Barrett before Election Day, saying he expects the Supreme Court to decide the outcome of his race against Democratic challenger Joe Biden, who leads in national opinion polls even as Trump seeks to sow doubts about the integrity of the voting process.

Barrett’s confirmation would give the court a 6-3 conservative majority and curb Roberts’ current role as its swing vote in close cases.

Pennsylvania Republicans had argued that the state Supreme Court had overstepped its authority in extending a deadline that should be left to the legislature. The Supreme Court’s four most conservative justices, including Trump’s two previous appointees Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, said they would have granted the Republican request.

CONFIRMATION LOOMS
The Senate Judiciary Committee held Barrett’s confirmation hearing last week and is expected to vote on Thursday to send her nomination to the full Senate for final approval next Monday. Republicans hold a 53-47 Senate majority, meaning Democrats have scant chance to halt her confirmation.

Slideshow ( 2 images )
Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy said Trump sees Barrett as election insurance, saying, “He wants her to side with him when he makes his usual baseless claims of mail-in voting fraud. He wants a ninth justice to hand him the election.”

“When you look at what’s going on,” added Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar, “there are just cases all over the country and the Supreme Court, in so many of those cases, could end up being the final arbiter.”

The Supreme Court only once has decided a presidential race. In 2000, its conservative majority clinched Republican George W. Bush’s victory over Democrat Al Gore with a 5-4 decision involving ballots in Florida.

During her confirmation hearing, Barrett said she would not be beholden to Trump in any election case.

“I certainly hope that all members of the committee have more confidence in my integrity than to think that I would allow myself to be used as a pawn to decide this election for the American people,” Barrett said, though she rebuffed Democratic pleas that she commit to recusing herself in such cases.

The Supreme Court may steer clear of a big election case this year, said Florida State University election law professor Michael Morley, noting an eagerness by Roberts not to thrust the justices into such disputes.

“I think this court is particularly aware of the judicial role and the desire to have the election decided by the people,” Morley added.

But Roberts has only a limited ability to steer the court clear of a big election case like the one in 2000, Stetson University election law professor Ciara Torres-Spelliscy said.

“You are likely to have a conservative majority that can do whatever they want,” Torres-Spelliscy added. “Chief Justice Roberts can’t control five justices who are to the right of him.”

 

[FaTaL]

Impeach Barr!

 

[voltronblack]

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham said in a statement on Wednesday that “Judge Barrett deserves a vote and she will receive a vote.”

Just hours earlier, Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer and Judiciary Committee Democrats said they would not show up for the vote. They have been urging Republicans to await the results of the Nov. 3 presidential election before advancing a nominee to fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by the September death of liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

“Amidst a global pandemic and ongoing election, Republicans are rushing to confirm a Supreme Court Justice to take away health care from millions and execute the extreme and deeply unpopular agenda that they’ve been unable to get through Congress,” the Democrats said.

“This has been a sham process from the beginning,” they said, noting that U.S. elections were only 12 days away and that early ballots already were being cast.

Graham, who is in a tough re-election campaign in South Carolina, countered, saying in his statement that Barrett “has a judicial disposition that should be the gold standard for all future nominees” to the high court.

All 12 Republicans on the Judiciary Committee have indicated they will support Barrett, a favorite of Christian conservatives, while all 10 Democrats are opposed. Graham is thus thought to have enough votes to prevail.

Assuming the Judiciary Committee sends the nomination to the full Senate with a favorable recommendation as expected, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell aims to hold a procedural vote on Barrett’s nomination on Sunday, which would limit debate so that a final vote to confirm her could occur on Monday.

LOOMING ELECTION
Democrats have fiercely opposed Barrett, a federal appeals court judge whose confirmation by the Republican-led Senate would expand the top U.S. judicial body’s conservative majority to 6-3.

McConnell, who has made confirmation of Trump’s conservative judicial appointees a high priority, has been working to get Barrett confirmed to the lifetime post before Election Day, as the Republican president has requested. Republicans hold a 53-47 Senate majority.

Trump has said he believes the Supreme Court will decide the election’s outcome as he faces Democratic challenger Joe Biden, and has made clear he wants Barrett on the bench for any election-related cases.

No nominee to the Supreme Court has ever been confirmed by the Senate this close to a presidential election.

Democrats reiterated their anger that Senate Republicans moved forward with the nomination so near the election after refusing in 2016 to allow the chamber to act on a Supreme Court nomination by Trump’s Democratic predecessor, Barack Obama, because it was an election year.

“Now, Republicans have moved at breakneck speed to jam through this nominee, ignoring her troubling record and unprecedented evasions, and breaking longstanding committee rules to set tomorrow’s vote,” the Democrats said in their statement.

“Fearing a loss at the ballot box, Republicans are showing that they do not care about the rules or what the American people want, but are concerned only with raw political power,” the statement added.

Barrett frustrated Judiciary Committee Democrats during her confirmation hearing last week by sidestepping questions on abortion, presidential powers, climate change, voting rights, Obamacare and other issues.

Ok for any of the political expert on here is there any kind of power moves the dem can pull off to stop her from getting in before the election is over .?

 

[Controversy]

Ok for any of the political expert on here is there any kind of power moves the dem can pull off to stop her from getting in before the election is over .?

short answer, no

dems just have to keep emphasizing that the GOP made this a higher priority than second round of robust stimulus, which would have benefited economic relief & recovery.

a blue tsunami is forthcoming, pack the courts, 3 liberals & a moderate to make things balanced.

 

[Elim Garak]

Ok for any of the political expert on here is there any kind of power moves the dem can pull off to stop her from getting in before the election is over .?

They could have done impeachment.

 

[Elim Garak]

If Dems don't pack the courts there will be major backlash from the base. It will hurt them in 2022 and 2024. Dems need to talk about rebalancing the courts and that its all constitutional. If they don't do that they will lose millennials and gen z.

How did you conclude there will be backlash from the base? That doesn't add up imo the base is clamoring for a win here lol.

 

[Controversy]

They could have done impeachment.

Which wouldn't have been wise during election season. Can't afford to turn off moderates & independents so close to the finish line.

 

[Elim Garak]

Which wouldn't have been wise during election season. Can't afford to turn off moderates & independents so close to the finish line.

Oh I agree it wouldn't have been good from that standpoint but that wasn't the question lol.

 

[The Fukin Prophecy]

Any Dem that votes for her must be voted out...

 

[voltronblack]

WASHINGTON — The Senate Judiciary Committee advanced the nomination Thursday of Amy Coney Barrett to serve as a Supreme Court justice in a 12-0 vote, with Democrats boycotting the day's proceeding.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., made it clear Wednesday that Democrats had no plans to “grant this process any further legitimacy by participating in a committee markup of this nomination just twelve days before the culmination of an election that is already underway.”

All 10 Democrats on the 22-member committee boycotted the vote and filled their empty seats in the committee room with posters of people who risk losing their health insurance if the Affordable Care Act is dismantled. Democrats argued throughout Barrett’s confirmation hearing last week that she would vote with other conservative justices to overturn the 2010 health care law. The high court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in a case challenging the law on Nov. 10.

Reacting to Democrats' decision not to participate Thursday, Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said, "That was their choice. It will be my choice to vote the nominee out of committee."

"We're not going to allow them to take over the committee. They made a choice not to participate," he added.

Graham praised Barrett for doing an "exceptionally good job of handling the questions asked" last week and complimented Democrats for "aggressively" challenging Barrett but not "inappropriately."

"It’s moments like this when you can tell young conservative women that there’s a place at the table for you," Graham said.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said that they were sitting in a "surreal environment" in which Democrats have boycotted what he called "one of the most important votes" senators will probably take during their tenure.

 

[The axe murderer]

Unqualified Impunity: Amy Coney Barrett Once Ruled That a Cop Wasn't Responsible for a Black Teenager's Death Because Breathing Isn't a Constitutional Right

 

[Lord Beasley]

if she's confirmed, we're one more step closer to Gilead