Amy Coney Barrett: this is the judge who alarms liberals

Why Trump’s candidate for justice puts liberals on alarm

Andrej Sokolow / dpa

With Amy Coney Barrett, an ever-conservative attorney will move to the United States Supreme Court. And one that has been willing to break with previous interpretations of the United States Constitution.

This position could become very important if a future Supreme Court with a clear conservative majority were to end proceedings again, for example, on the legality of abortions or same-sex marriages. Both are considered quite probable.

Why are liberals alarmed?

The attitude that alarmed liberals was formulated by Barrett in a 2013 article: “I tend to agree with those who say that a judge is constitutionally bound, and that it is more legitimate for her to enforce her understanding of the constitution than that it is a previous decision that contradicts it from their point of view. “However, at the same time, the arguments to preserve the previous decision must also be taken into account, he restricted.

In her post-nomination speech, Barrett said she was committed to the philosophy of arch-conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in 2016, of following the wording of the law. “I love America and I love the Constitution of the United States.” She prepares for resistance to her positions: “I have no illusions that the road ahead is easy, in the short or long term.”

What are your beliefs?

Barrett has been a staunch Catholic for decades. That is why in 2017 the hearing for his current position as judge in an appeals court was more than once on the question of whether faith could influence his decisions.

“I don’t see any contradiction between sincere faith and my duties as a judge,” Barrett said at the time. She will only be guided by the law. And: “I would never impose my personal convictions under the law.” A judge should never decide on the desire to achieve a certain result.

How do American politicians express themselves?

Some senators, both Democrats and Republicans, suggested at the time that their own experiences and views inevitably influenced legal decisions. In particular, Democratic Sen. Diane Feinstein described Barrett as “controversial.”

These topics include the right to abortion and same-sex marriages. The Supreme Court ruled in 1973 and 2015 that they were guaranteed by the United States Constitution. They are a thorn in the side of the arch-conservatives in America.

What is Barrett’s opinion on these issues?

At his 2017 hearing, Barrett evaded any questions about whether he agreed with the Supreme Court’s decisions on the issues at stake. It didn’t matter because he inevitably had to follow Supreme Court jurisprudence in the court of appeals, he argued. “When it comes to same-sex marriages, my beliefs won’t matter at all,” Barrett said, among other things. These questions are likely to come up again when challenged in the Senate. In 2017 it was confirmed with a majority of 55 of the 100 senatorial votes.

What are your most controversial cases?

Barrett handled several controversial cases in his three years as an appeals judge. In 2019, he contradicted his court’s decision that it was legal to convict offenders. Weapon possession to refuse. Barrett argued that such a general rule made the second amendment to the United States Constitution, which enshrined gun ownership, “a second-class right.” Instead, the ban should only apply to people who are dangerous.

Barrett’s appeals court tried multiple times Procedure related to abortion. She joined a majority vote that upheld a ruling in Chicago that pro-life men cannot approach women in clinics. After a chamber of three judges ruled unconstitutional an Indiana law that young women had to inform their parents before an abortion, they voted for the entire court to hear the case, but it was struck down.

How did you make your career?

Barrett grew up in a suburb of New Orleans, studied law, among other things, at the private Catholic University Notre Dame. She was a law professor there until her position on the appeals court. As early as 1998, it was noted that Barrett was a co-author of an article that argued that Catholics among judges should withdraw from cases where they deemed incompatible with their beliefs, such as decisions on the death penalty. She continues to believe in that, Barrett said at the 2017 Senate hearing.

Also frequently picked up was a 2006 speech in which Barrett taught Notre Dame graduates whose legal careers are a means to an end: “That end is to build the kingdom of God.” You should follow the same ethical standards as everyone else. “But if you can remember that your ultimate goal in life is not to be a lawyer, but to love, know and serve God, you will really be a different kind of lawyer,” he said.

Barrett is married to a former prosecutor and has seven children, two of whom are adopted from Haiti. He belongs to the Catholic faith group “People of Praise”, which was founded in the 1970s by graduates of Notre Dame. Some former members claimed that the People of Praise ideology included a subordinate role for women, which the group rejected. (sda / dpa)