Jump to content

Yay for Justice Barrett’s Confirmation! But It Exposed a Major Senate “Fail.”


Draggingtree

Recommended Posts

yay-for-justice-barretts-confirmation-but-it-exposed-a-major-senate-fail
Ricochet

Yay for Justice Barrett’s Confirmation! But It Exposed a Major Senate “Fail.”

 By Bucknelldad

 October 27, 2020 (4 Hours Ago)

27 COMMENTS

 Conservatives like me, and most notably conservative women and working moms everywhere, have every reason to cheer Judge – now Justice – Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation to the US Supreme Court. Those of us who adhere to the traditional role of our judicial system under our brilliant Constitution cheer loudest.

But for me, as a former Senate official who loves and reveres Senate tradition, this is bittersweet

You do not see any Democratic Senators in their seats for a Supreme Court confirmation vote. Every previous Supreme Court confirmation vote I’ve attended or watched, going back to Robert Bork’s defeat, featured every Senator attending the vote in person and voting from their seat, standing when called to cast an “aye” or “nay” vote. It is a great Senate tradition, showing great respect for the gravity of their vote.

I was watching C-SPAN, which doesn’t scan the entire floor very often, but it appeared that every Republic  :snip: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Morning Report - 10/27/20

—J.J. Sefton

image.png.a557067acbf3d4af7cddec769726951d.pngGood morning, kids. Tuesday and it's a beautiful morning. Amy Coney Barrett was sworn in last night after being confirmed by a Harry Reid simple majority in the Senate. The swearing in of Justice Barrett to take the empty seat on the Supreme Court is filled with a number of metaphors as well as at least one deliciously ironic coincidence; yesterday was Hillary Clinton's birthday. Just over four years ago, the now deceased predecessor of Justice Barrett, who was no spring chicken even then and a double cancer survivor was urged to step down so that Barack Obama could appoint her successor, one who would be equally anti-Constitutional. But no. She was determined to bitterly cling to that seat so that she could live to see her successor sworn in by Hillary, who was after all, a 100% lead pipe cinch to be the first female president (the jury is still out as to whether or not that was, in fact, Obama or James Buchanan). If you're reading this post wherever you are, how did that work out for you? :snip: 

A little reminder about judicial philosophy for our Leftist chums. The Constitution is no more a living and breathing thing as is a brick. Words have meaning and the words in our governing documents are not poetry, not from the Kabballa, or "E Pleb Neesta.":snip: http://ace.mu.nu/archives/390997.php

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10/26/2020

Filed under: General — JVW @ 5:05 pm
Comments (90)

[guest post by JVW]

I’m watching live on CSPAN-2. Judge (now Justice) Barrett has 52 yes votes versus 43 no votes. Instead of voting audibly when called upon, Democrat Senators appear to be making a show of walking down to the Senate well in order to literally cast a thumbs-down vote. But she has passed the 51 vote threshold and the confirmation is now done.

Congratulations to President Trump for nominating a fine jurist and impressive woman. Congratulations to his team and to the folks at the Federalist Society for bringing her to his fleeting attention. Congratulations to Cocaine Mitch McConnell and Senator Lindsey Graham for their resolve in seeing her through, and for uniting Republicans with the exception of Susan Collins in support of her  :snip: 

http://patterico.com/2020/10/26/justice-amy-coney-barrett/– JVW

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
  • 1711697197
×
×
  • Create New...