[ad_1]
During the week, Donald Trump spoke of five candidates whose suitability and prospects he was examining more closely. But there was only one serious option from the beginning: Amy Coney Barrett has been nominated by the president as a candidate for the Supreme Court.
It can already be said that he is a person of historical importance.
First, there is Barrett’s legal profile and the way he is likely to shape Supreme Court jurisprudence if, which seems very strong, is upheld by the Senate. The Supreme Court would move to the right in its composition. After the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, only three lawyers considered liberal are sitting on the stand; Barrett would be the sixth conservative.
The 48-year-old was appointed as a federal judge at the Court of Appeals of the Seventh District Court in 2017, based in Chicago. Prior to that, she was a professor at Notre Dame Law School and an assistant to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in 2016 and is revered in conservative legal circles. Like Scalia, she advocates the conservative reading of the Constitution known as “originalism” or “textualism.” (Read more about this here).
Barrett and her husband, Jesse, a former federal attorney, have seven children, including two adopted from Haiti and a son with Down syndrome. The lawyer’s religious convictions were already the subject of controversy in the process before the Senate, which ended three years ago when she was confirmed as a federal judge. The “dogma alive out loud” in Barrett, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein held before her at the time, with a view to the candidate’s views on the abortion issue. Barrett rejected it: she could very well distinguish between her Catholic faith and her duties as a judge. Republicans in the Senate took advantage of the episode and accused Democrats of subjecting the candidate to a “religious test”; Right-wing commentators accused them of prejudice against Catholics.
What Happened: Barrett and her husband are members of a religious group called “People of Worship,” whose practices may seem strange to some mainstream Catholics. Followers pledge allegiance for life. Personal mentors exercise considerable authority, including counseling on members’ married life, in which women, according to group teachings, owe their husbands obedience. Even then, constitutional lawyers expressed concern that such loyalty oaths could undermine the independence of a judge. Democrats are very likely to make the issue the subject of hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
President Donald Trump: “The matter will go to the Supreme Court”
Photo: CARLOS BARRIA / REUTERS
Democrats’ top three concerns
Trump’s challenger Joe Biden’s party is doing three things: On the one hand, they fear Barrett could help. “Roe v. Wade” to incline. The groundbreaking and controversial ruling of the Supreme Court of 1973 established the right of pregnant women to choose an abortion for themselves. It is true that during her Senate hearing three years ago, the candidate repeatedly promised to respect and apply all the prejudices of the Supreme Court – including “Roe v. Wade” – as binding. But at the time it was only about her appeal in federal court.
However, as a Supreme Court justice, you could help shape your jurisprudence. A Supreme Court justice must primarily enforce the Constitution and not precedents that she believes are clearly in conflict with it, Barrett wrote in a 2013 article for the Texas Law Review. Democrats fear – and Republicans hope and hope – that Barrett’s legal vision, along with her strict rejection of abortions on religious grounds, will contribute to the end of Roe v. Wade.
Another Democratic concern is Barack Obama’s health care reform. In 2017, Barrett criticized Chief Justice John Roberts for failing “Obamacare” keep. Roberts extended the law “beyond its plausible meaning” to save it, he wrote in an article for a legal magazine.
Before the Supreme Court in Washington DC: mourning Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Photo: JOSHUA ROBERTS / REUTERS
Third, there is the president and his unfounded, but months-long attacks on the legitimacy of the November 3 elections. More recently, Trump repeatedly refused to make a peaceful transition after the Presidential election and instead he whispered that the question of the result of the vote would land in the Supreme Court. There, by the president’s obvious calculation, a conservative majority would decide in his favor even in the event of an electoral defeat.
However, that this happens is anything but agreed. In recent years, the conservative Roberts has earned a reputation as the guardian of the court’s independence. Judge Neil Gorsuch, who took office three and a half years ago at Trump’s suggestion, in turn contributed to a mid-June ruling prohibiting discrimination against gay and transgender people in the workplace. And with the rest of the conservative justices as well, there is reasonable hope that they will avoid keeping Trump in the White House despite the electoral defeat, including Barrett.
A transcendental personality, regardless of any vow
But there are some signs that Trump’s candidate will have a significant impact on the fate of the country regardless of the vote of any judge. Because the question of Ginsburg’s successor is already shaping the fight for the White House and the race for about a third of the 100 Senate seats. Republicans want to mobilize their religious-conservative base with the candidate. Yet, at the same time, they motivate Democratic supporters, and a tough anti-abortion candidate could deter moderate voters in the suburbs in particular.
If that helps Democrats not only win the presidential election, but also the majority in the Senate, it could in turn affect the future of the Supreme Court. The flimsy approach of the Republicans, who, in contradiction to their blocking stance of 2016, want to occupy the post of Ginsburg judge again, makes part of the democratic base think of retaliation. Biden has already spoken out against adding staff to the court in the event of an election victory. But other reforms of the Supreme Court are also being discussed, such as cutting its power by introducing a quorum.
A reform of the court, a long run for Trump’s candidate in a conservative-dominated Supreme Court, a decision on the outcome of the election, no matter which of the possible scenarios occurs: Barrett’s justices could become the most momentous events in recent United States history.
