Tag: Amy Coney Barrett

Join Jim and Greg as they welcome CNN’s Wolf Blitzer getting a reality check on police work. They also shudder as the far left starts lining up for cabinet spots in a possible Biden administration. And as the Girl Scouts delete an innocuous tweet congratulating Amy Coney Barrett because of complaints from lefties, Jim implores Americans to stand up for themselves and tell the mob to go pound sand.

Join Jim and Greg as they cheer the confirmation of Justice Amy Coney Barrett. They also discuss the Philadelphia police-involved shooting of a man advancing toward officers with a knife and the resulting violence that left 30 officers injured, including 12 in the hospital. And they break down the left’s unhinged reaction to the Barrett confirmation – from immediate calls for court packing to claiming originalism is racist – while Jim points out that the left probably ought to blame Ruth Bader Ginsburg for Barrett being on the court.

Join Jim and Greg as they see plenty of votes lined up to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. They also dig further into Joe Biden’s energy plan and see just how quickly he wants to wipe out fossil fuels. And they wince as Biden literally forgets who he’s running against.

On today’s episode of American Wonk, FREOPP’s Avik Roy talks with Ilya Shapiro, author of “Supreme Disorder,” a new book on the politics of the Supreme Court. They talk about Amy Coney Barrett and ask: what have conservatives gotten right and wrong in their quest to change how the Supreme Court thinks about the Constitution?

Supreme Disorder: Judicial Nominations and the Politics of America’s Highest Court

Ep. 262 – Senator Ted Cruz joins Whiskey Politics with Dave Sussman for a special in-depth, long-form discussion on the critical issues heading into Election 2020; SCOTUS, Spygate, did the Senator say the Election may be a ‘Bloodbath’ for Republicans? Senator Cruz also discusses his incredible new book One Vote Away detailing the most pivotal Supreme Court cases of our time, and will Ted Cruz accept a SCOTUS nomination from President Donald Trump?

Join Jim and Greg as they watch staffers of disgraced former California Rep. Katie Hill accuse her of abusing and mistreating her staff just as Hill’s victim narrative is about to become a movie. They also cheer new polling showing a significant jump in support for Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett in just one week. And they have fun as the Democrat running for U.S. Senate in Kansas has no idea what the Patriot Act is.

Ep. 260 – David Bossie, Trump-Pence 2020 Senior Advisor, President of Citizens United and New York Times Bestselling Author (latest book – Trump: America First – The President Succeeds Against All Odds with co-author Corey Lewandowski.) David debates why he thinks Trump’s first debate was a win, discusses voter fraud, SCOTUS and Amy Coney Barrett, Spygate and ‘the Soft Coup’, and whether any Durham Report would impact the election.

Doing Justice to the Barrett Nomination

 

To the glee of his conservative base and to the consternation of his progressive opponents, President Trump has nominated Amy Coney Barrett for a seat on the United States Supreme Court. My own preference, which was shared by others, such as Peggy Noonan, was to delay a vote on the nominee until after the election. But the course of events has moved rapidly in the other direction, and a no-holds-barred nomination fight is now upon us.

In earlier times, Judge Barrett’s consistent level of high performance would have led to confirmation by acclamation under the now-disregarded practice of evaluating a judge’s legal understanding and technical competence, independent of her political orientation. But these are not normal times. Indeed, the current fight resembles the appointment of John Marshall, our greatest chief justice, to the Supreme Court by President John Adams on March 3, 1801, the day before Thomas Jefferson was sworn in as president.

Senator Mitch McConnell’s prompt announcement that the president would move forward with the nomination rests on the fact that McConnell had sufficient votes in his pocket. McConnell and Trump may think that they will gain a powerful political advantage by forcing the Democrats into a two-pronged strategy of massive resistance. The first is an all-out attack on Barrett for her religious associations, most notably her membership in People of Praise, a predominantly Roman Catholic faith community formed in 1971. The second is an institutional challenge, represented by Senator Elizabeth Warren’s adamant refusal to confirm a new Supreme Court justice until after inauguration on January 20, 2021. The Democratic playbook threatens to pack the Supreme Court if Barrett is confirmed, or to limit the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court so that it could not review Biden administration proposals, like implementing the Green New Deal or increasing the rights and power of unions. Progressives by and large are fearful of judicial intervention by a conservative court that would challenge their culture war victories, upset their efforts to reshape the economy from top to bottom, and remake the regulatory world to be friendlier to business.

Courageous ACB in Her Own Words

 

Amy Coney Barrett and TrumpJudge Amy Coney Barrett is her own woman, not the next Scalia/Alito/Thomas. She has thought her way through court business since law school, laying out her concerns and reasoning in plain print. While court opinions and law review articles can be a bit daunting, she writes clearly enough for the lay reader to understand.

Instead of accepting the pre-spun sound bytes and clipped quotes, we should look to the available complete video and writings of Amy Coney Barrett. I salute Heavy for having provided quotes with links to sources back in 2018, when ACB was under consideration to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy. A quick search on YouTube and Barrett’s Notre Dame Law School faculty page yielded a helpful set of videos and writings, outside of court opinions, with Courageous ACB in her own words.*

Summarizing ACB’s law review articles, she has thought her way through the role of courts since law school. Her first publication of note, a 1997 article, addressed one instance of people of faith living obediently to a higher authority while also participating in a system of secular law. At the time, she believed that Roman Catholic church teaching barred faithful judges from participation in death penalty cases. She concluded that judicial ethics rules allowed these judges to recuse themselves, so allowing Catholics to be faithful to both heavenly and earthly authority. The rest of her public writings flesh out her views on interpreting the Constitution and on the power of precedent.

Two D’s on the Senate Judiciary Committee Refuse to Meet with Amy Coney Barrett

 

They think they are snubbing her, however, they are really doing her a big favor. Judge Barrett will be spared the inane comments and ugly questions of Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Mazie Hirono of Hawaii. Hirono is just stupid and Blumenthal is just mean. She doesn’t need to waste her valuable time meeting with them before the assault of the hearings. Gives Barrett more time to prepare.

The Dogma Lives Loudly Within Me

 

And, if I don’t much flatter myself, it doesn’t stop me from being a clearer thinker than your average Senate Democrat.

One thing my dogma tells me is that there are a lot of sins we humans do that are none of the government’s business to stop–gossip, lust, laziness, gluttony, not praying enough, not following the Golden Rule, and the list goes on.

It also tells me about some other sins that are in a different category. The government might actually have a role in preventing them–divorce for reasons other than infidelity, for example.

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.

Member Post

 

There seems to be some misunderstanding that there will there be a 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court after Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed. John Roberts is not conservative in any meaningful judicial sense, neither interpreting laws based on their original public meaning (originalism) nor through some conservative view. And so, while there will […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

“Judge of the Decade”, the Honorable Michael Warren (6th Circuit Court, Oakland County, MI) Author & Co-Creator of the Patriot Week Foundation https://www.patriotweek.org/ discusses the contentious and history-making Trump nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States. From a Constitutional perspective, can Democrats go through with their threats to “pack the court”? How and when did SCOTUS become so politicized? If Trump wins reelection, will a second term see a 7-2 Conservative court and how would that impact the country?

Join Jim and Greg as they welcome Sen. Dianne Feinstein – the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee – saying she opposes ending the legislative filibuster. Without killing the filibuster, Democrats would be unable to add seats to the Supreme Court, but is Feinstein sincere or is she just worried about touting court packing before the election? They also brace for a violent day or more in Louisville as officials announce whether police officers will face charges for the shooting death of Breonna Taylor in March. And they unload on media outlets for not only beginning to attack possible Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett but for getting the story spectacularly wrong.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America celebrate President Trump’s pick, Judge Brett Kavanaugh, to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court. They also reflect on what could have been had Trump nominated Catholic, conservative, mother-of-seven Judge Amy Coney Barrett. And they dismiss the single-source claim of NBC Reporter Leigh Ann Caldwell that Kennedy negotiated his replacement to be Kavanaugh before he stepped down. They also highlight the volatile protesters, who appeared with signs to reject any candidate that Trump selected and who forced Fox News Host Shannon Bream to cancel her show outside the Supreme Court.

Amy Coney Barrett’s “Cult”

 

When Notre Dame law professor and possible Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett was nominated for the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, her affiliation with a religious group called People of Praise raised red flags. It was some sort of cult, they implied. Sen. Dianne Feinstein famously reproved the nominee by intoning that “the dogma lives loudly within you and that’s of concern.”

It was an echo of the kind of anti-Catholic bigotry that characterized American life for centuries. When the Democrats nominated the first Roman Catholic for president, Al Smith in 1928, opponents warned that all Protestant marriages would be annulled and all Protestant children declared bastards if the Catholic were elected. Republicans circulated pictures of Smith posing before the almost-completed Holland Tunnel with a caption declaring that instead of emptying into New Jersey, it really led 3,500 miles under the Atlantic Ocean to the basement of the Vatican. After his loss to Herbert Hoover, Smith was reputed to have quipped that he had sent a one-word telegram to the Pope: “Unpack.”

But Feinstein’s comment and others’ insinuations that her religion is somehow creepy or suspicious reveals a broader anti-religious bias.