Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Trump Nominates Amy Coney Barrett to the US Supreme Court
At a Saturday Rose Garden ceremony, President Donald Trump officially nominated Amy Coney Barrett to serve on the US Supreme Court. Barrett, 48, currently serves as a judge of the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and as a law professor at Notre Dame University. From 1998 to 1999, she clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia.
“She is a woman of unparalleled achievement, towering intellect, sterling credentials, and unyielding loyalty to the Constitution,” Trump said in his introductory remarks.
In her statement, Barrett honored Ruth Bader Ginsburg and praised her friendship with Antonin Scalia. Of her former boss, Barrett said, “his judicial philosophy is mine, too. A judge must apply the law as written. Judges are not policymakers and they must be resolute in setting aside any policy views they might hold.”
Senate Republicans are working to confirm Barrett by Election Day, Nov. 3.
“This should be a straightforward and prompt confirmation,” Trump said at the ceremony. “Should be very easy. Good luck. It’s going to be very quick.”
Published in Law, Politics
Yes!!!! Take the vote!
And let the hate begin
I’m hoping Mitch and Lindsey won’t put up with it for two seconds. She was just recently confirmed. They have their questions answered. Take the damn vote!
This line of attack should really work well…
3 days of hearings next week
Vote on Friday.
Yes, a week of visits with those Senators who had not had a chance to question her in the appellate court confirmation fight. Then 3 days of hearings and vote. No tolerance of delay tactics, as these are only to cue up the next smear, likely against her husband if they do not have some way to smear her as a bigot.
I hope Graham has the option of cutting short the “deb-hate” and calling the vote and I hope he exercises it good and hard just as soon as Democrats start the calumny.
Now Democrats finally have a name they can fill in on their pre-made signs! (Like they did with Gorsuch!)
The 2017 confirmation hearings are available on C-SPAN.
This Heavy.com article on Amy Coney Barrett, while trying to be critical, is fair in presenting what she has actually said and written.
I enjoyed the pushback to that racist tweet.
Honestly, the Left has gone completely round the bend. Witness the pearl-clutching about how ACB’s membership in an ecumenical group they don’t like must be some sort of indication that she submits to a “dominant husband” and “disappearing woman” motif in the history of Western civilization. (For a bracing refresher on same, I suggest you watch this video of a conversation between Camille Paglia and Jordan Peterson, one I wrote about slightly over two years ago, here. Or, just consider Proverbs 31:10-31.)
As for all the shouting about how “People of Praise” was the model for Margaret Atwood’s A Handmaid’s Tale: Yeah, right. Because all those sad and bitter women in the flying nun hats and enveloping, burka-like red robes had successful careers as independent and senior federal jurists who won confirmation through the process ordained by the US Constitution before they turned into stars on a low-rent TV show. Just spare me, please.
Surely, if this is who Mr. and Mrs. Barrett really are, it would have been easier, and much more correctly and loudly dogmatic, for her husband have announced, years ago that the fact that her feet were smaller than his was so that she could stand closer to the kitchen sink, and that no wife of his was ever going to work outside the home.
Crimenutely. What fools these Leftists be.
When I get my time machine going, I’m going to go back and prevent Margaret Atwood from writing The Handmaid’s Tale. Then I’ll never have to hear another cruddy comparison to it again. I swear some of these people have only ever read one book.
Actually, they’ve probably never read it.
Good idea. Not that I want to make you work too hard or anything, but could I please send you a list?
One of my daughters is a Never Trumper who is now enthusiastically supporting Trump because of the selection of Amy Coney Barrett. Who knew? My first thought was Barbara Lagoa would have been the better political pick as she would appeal to the Latino community, but my daughter’s reasoning convinced me he made the better choice based on Barrett’s legal brilliance and the fact that she is a solid family person with seven children who practices her religion faithfully. She has convinced me that suburban women will vote for him because of this pick. Maybe she’s right.
The one argument that could be made for prolonged hearings is that the more airtime the Dem Senators get to show their awful selves, all the better for the Republican senate and Trump campaigns. It just wouldn’t be fair to Barrett family.
I think that Ms. Coney Barrett could turn around the hearing and make the attacking senators look like idiots. With her poise, the beauty and love that she exudes, her background and support, she has the opportunity to make them all look small and petty. May G-d bless her and support her through this ordeal and opportunity.
Peggy Noonan’s column quotes a woman who also belongs to People of Praise. The woman laughed at the assumptions people were making about her and this group, and she sounded strong and independent, with a great sense of humor. I’d love for the senate committee to interview her, too!
It was a super day! I spent an hour in the afternoon holding a 40 Days for Life sign to end abortion in front of a local hospital that performs abortions. Came home to find Trump had nominated Amy Coney Barrett. What a beautiful day.
https://youtu.be/P1M9m068mbw
While you’re back in time, do something to stop Rachel Carson too . . .
Much of the “pearl-clutching” is because too much of the media has familiarity with (or even contact with) the churches and faith communities that many of us take for granted as part of our lives. We make commitments to others, we seek the advice of people who have demonstrated wisdom, etc.
While I often disagree with David French, I agree with much of his analysis of this.
I have noticed this in much reporting on religious groups that some consider “unusual” or “fringe.” The “reporting” betrays a complete unfamiliarity with any culture of faith community involvement that many if not most Americans consider a normal part of our daily lives.
Also, I keep thinking of that if Ms. Barrett is supposed to be a member of some woman-oppressing cult, either the cult is particularly incompetent at its women oppression, or she is a particularly uncooperative member of the cult.