President Donald J, Trump nominated Amy Coney Barrett (ACB) to fill the vacant seat on the US Supreme Court for a life term, shocking the left who are upset with her Christian religion, her status as a working mother, her status as an adoptive mother, and her strong defense of the US Constitution.
The left has done a lot of political theater around this case, including screaming at the President and First Lady, Melania Trump, but what they are afraid to talk about is why they are so upset and worried.
They are afraid of what Barrett thinks about the Constitution says about American’s civil liberties. We consulted their media to find out what they are most worried about.
THE RIGHT SAYS:
Barrett has shown through her nearly 100 written opinions on the appellate court that she is a strong Constitutional originalist who will not cut the American people out of their own gov’t by treating SCOTUS as a 3rd chamber of Congress.”
Fox News published an Oped by Senator Mike braun, who said “Judge Amy Coney Barrett is a consummately qualified jurist who has proven on and off the bench that she has the decency, the intellectual rigor, and the fundamental respect for our country and its Constitution to serve honorably on the Supreme Court.”
WHAT THE LEFT SAYS:
USNEWS.com posted about ACB’s most “Notable Opinions” :
As a judge on the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Barrett, 48, has voted in favor of one of Trump’s hardline immigration policies and shown support for expansive gun rights. Here are some of her most notable opinions.
Barrett indicated support for gun rights in a March 2019 dissenting opinion.
She was part of a three-judge panel that considered a challenge to a federal law that bars people convicted of felonies from owning firearms. A businessman who had pleaded guilty to mail fraud argued the law was unconstitutional as applied to him.
The two other judges, both appointed by Republican President Ronald Reagan, said the federal law and a similar Wisconsin one were constitutional.
In a dissent, Barrett said that, absent evidence the man was violent, permanently disqualifying him from owning a gun violated the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
“History is consistent with common sense: it demonstrates that legislatures have the power to prohibit dangerous people from possessing guns,” Barrett wrote. “But that power extends only to people who are dangerous.”
Abortion rights groups have expressed concern that if appointed, Barrett could help overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide.
Although Barrett has not ruled directly on abortion as a judge, she has cast votes signaling opposition to rulings that struck down abortion-related restrictions.
In 2016, Indiana passed a law requiring that fetal remains be buried or cremated after an abortion.
After some judges found the law unconstitutional, Barrett voted in favor of rehearing the case. She was outnumbered, but the Supreme Court later reinstated the Indiana law.
In 2019, Barrett voted to rehear a panel’s ruling that upheld a challenge to another Republican-backed Indiana abortion law. The Indiana measure would require that parents be notified when a girl under 18 is seeking an abortion even in situations in which she has asked a court to provide consent instead of her parents.
The Supreme Court ordered in July that the case be reconsidered.
In June, Barrett said in a dissenting opinion that she would have let one of Trump’s hardline immigration policies go forward in Illinois.
The litigation was over the “public charge” rule, a policy of denying legal permanent residency to certain immigrants deemed likely to require government assistance in the future.
Barrett dissented when a three-judge panel voted to halt the policy in Illinois.
They are also worried about voting rights: