[ad_1]
(CNN) – President Donald Trump announced Saturday that he has appointed Judge Amy Coney Barrett to replace the late Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court during a flag-adorned ceremony in the Rose Garden of the White House.
If confirmed, Barrett, a conservative jurist appointed by Trump in 2017 to the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, will undoubtedly tilt the high court to the right in the coming years.
Here are some of Barrett’s most notable writings:
Second amendment
In 2019, Barrett disagreed alone when a majority of the Seventh Circuit panel rejected a Second Amendment challenge of a man convicted of a felony mail fraud and prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal and federal law. Wisconsin.
“History is consistent with common sense: it shows that legislatures have the power to prohibit dangerous people from possessing weapons,” he wrote in Kanter v. Barr, applying an originalist approach that looked towards the intentions of the 18th century. But that power extends only to people who are dangerous. The founding legislatures did not deprive criminals of the right to bear arms simply because of their status as criminals. ‘
Barrett concluded: “To hold that the ban is constitutional … does not test the government, but treats the Second Amendment as a second-class right.”
Public charge
In June, Barrett disagreed when a Seventh Circuit panel left intact a U.S. district court decision that temporarily blocked a Trump policy that hurt green card applicants seeking public assistance. Federal immigration regulations were disputed regarding when an applicant would be considered a “public charge” and ineligible for permanent status in the United States.
In his disagreement, Barrett wrote that the Trump administration’s interpretation of the relevant “public charge” law was not “unreasonable.”
“Ultimately, the plaintiffs’ objections reflect disagreement with this policy choice and even the legal exclusion itself. Litigation is not the vehicle for resolving policy disputes. Because I believe the DHS definition is a reasonable interpretation of the legal term ‘public charge,’ I respectfully disagree, “he wrote.
Majority of the Seventh Circuit in Cook County v. Wolf replied that the Barrett construction did not take into account the immigrants who would “bear the brunt” of the new rule.
Abortion
In 2018, when the entire Seventh Circuit refused to reconsider a dispute over an Indiana abortion regulation, which required post-abortion fetal remains to be cremated or buried, Barrett disagreed with his fellow conservatives. They began by focusing on a more contentious provision that had previously been invalidated and not subject to appeal.
That provision prohibited doctors from performing an abortion because of the race, sex, or disability of the fetus. Barrett joined a dissent written by Judge Frank Easterbrook referring to the law as a “eugenics statute.”
“None of the court’s abortion decisions hold that states are powerless to prevent abortions designed to choose the sex, race and other attributes of children,” added the discrepancy.
Affordable Care Act
In an early 2017 law review essay reviewing a rule related to the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Affordable Care Act, Barrett criticized Chief Justice John Roberts’s rationale that he saved the law in 2012.
“Chief Justice Roberts pushed the Affordable Care Act beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute,” Barrett wrote. “He interpreted the sanction imposed on those who did not have health insurance as a tax, which allowed him to uphold the statute as a valid exercise of the tax authority.”
At another point, Barrett refers to “Roberts’s devotion to constitutional evasion.”
The high court is scheduled to take on the latest Obamacare challenge on November 10.
Vogue’s Ariane and CNN’s Dan Berman contributed to this report.
