Jump to content

Trump nominates Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court


Valin

Recommended Posts

‘SCOTUScare’: Here’s What Amy Coney Barrett Has Said About Obamacare In The Past

Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett criticized Chief Justice John Roberts’s 2012 majority decision that upheld the Affordable Care Act.

 

Barrett’s criticism was part of a 2017 Notre Dame University Law Review article in which she reviewed legal scholar Randy Barnett’s book “Our Republican Constitution.” President Donald Trump nominated Barrett, a judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, at the White House Saturday to fill the vacancy left by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died on Sept. 18.

“Chief Justice Roberts pushed the Affordable Care Act beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute,” Barrett wrote. (RELATED: Democrats Cite Upcoming Obamacare Supreme Court Case In Opposing Potential Trump Appointment. Here Are The Details)

In National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, Roberts ruled that the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate statute was constitutional if it was interpreted as a tax instead of a penalty. The individual mandate was the provision that said those who didn’t sign up for health insurance would be fined.:snip:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Geee said:

Barrett Will Sail

 

The Left is going to find Amy Coney Barrett a tough nut to attack. She is smart, pleasant, and competent. Her personal history is an open book of service and commitment.

 

What Roger Kimball clearly doesn't understand is Everything Donald Trump is wrong and must be resisted. So Amy Coney Barrett must opposed, because Donald Teump IS a poopyhead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HuffPo: Amy Coney Barrett Is Trump’s Likely Supreme Court Pick. Here’s What We Know About Her.

We now know one of the lines of attack

1. She has been tied to a religious group that called female leaders “handmaids.”

Barrett has, and may still be, a member of People of Praise, a group that describes itself as a “charismatic” Christian community...

2.She called Roe v. Wade an “erroneous decision.”

Barrett said the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision ensuring women’s access to abortion was an “erroneous decision” in a 2003 article......

3. She took a speaking fee from a group that believes in forced sterilization for transgender people.

The letter cited a speaking fee Barrett took from Alliance Defending Freedom, the largest anti-LGBTQ legal advocacy group in the nation. The ADF has defended forced sterilization for transgender people and has been dubbed a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center......

_____________________________________________________________________________

 

This going to get...Ugly!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, Al Sharpton has something to say about Amy Coney Barrett’s black adopted children

MSNBC host and noted anti-Semite Al Sharpton is a one-note samba.

 

On Saturday, following a White House event wherein President Trump nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, the cable news host complained that the crowd at the nominating event was not diverse enough.

Not diverse enough, that is, except for Barrett’s two adopted black children.

“That was the least diverse audience I've ever seen in an announcement like this made in my life,” Sharpton complained, doing basically the only thing he knows how to do.

He added, “I looked around. I was glad her two kids did come out because I couldn't find too many other people of color in that audience.” Fellow MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace dumbly nodded along, agreeing that it was “an interesting look for a moment like this in this presidency and a decision so monumental.”

Come for the tokenizing of Barrett’s adopted children. Stay for Sharpton’s tortured pronunciation of the name “Antonin.”:snip:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Geee said:

Of course, Al Sharpton has something to say about Amy Coney Barrett’s black adopted children

MSNBC host and noted anti-Semite Al Sharpton is a one-note samba.

 

On Saturday, following a White House event wherein President Trump nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, the cable news host complained that the crowd at the nominating event was not diverse enough.

Not diverse enough, that is, except for Barrett’s two adopted black children.

“That was the least diverse audience I've ever seen in an announcement like this made in my life,” Sharpton complained, doing basically the only thing he knows how to do.

He added, “I looked around. I was glad her two kids did come out because I couldn't find too many other people of color in that audience.” Fellow MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace dumbly nodded along, agreeing that it was “an interesting look for a moment like this in this presidency and a decision so monumental.”

Come for the tokenizing of Barrett’s adopted children. Stay for Sharpton’s tortured pronunciation of the name “Antonin.”:snip:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

21, 2020Posted by Sebastian in Politics | 116 comments

Naked Power Plays

The McConnell hate is palpable right now. If you don’t think the Dems would have done the same thing if the situation were reversed, I have a bridge to sell you. They would be fools not to.

Most of politics is slinging bullshit. You weave a narrative for the rubes to rally around.

“Let the next President fill the seat!”

“Do your job!”

“It was her dying wish!”

“Mitch is a hypocrite!”

It’s all nonsense that will be repeated mindlessly by partisan cheerleaders. If the Dems had been in charge of the Senate, Merrick Gardland or someone more liberal would be on the court right now, and to me that’s a consequence of losing elections. If Hillary had won and the Dems won back the Senate in 2018, no one vilifying Cocaine Mitch right now would be complaining about Schumer allowing a vote on RBG’s replacement. What surprises me is how many educated people are fall for “The Narrative.”

This is raw, naked, political power, as our system is designed to allow. Anyone who thinks higher principles are involved here is a fool. Mitch McConnell is doing exactly what Chuck Schumer would be doing if the party was reversed. When the party in the White House, controls the Senate, they can put whoever they want on the federal courts without compromise. That’s how the system is designed to work. If you want a check, the party that doesn’t hold the White House needs to take the Senate. If you fail to do that, these are the consequences.   :snip:  https://www.pagunblog.com/2020/09/21/naked-power-plays/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1713481282
×
×
  • Create New...